News media are constantly being maligned, and there is a prevailing perception that media workers ended up in the profession because they did not apply themselves in school. Day in, day out they are accused of disseminating misinformation and even creating “fake news.”
However, those levying these criticisms should ask themselves if they are prepared to take responsibility for the articles that they “like” or share online.
The Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, published by the school’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy, last month ran a peer-reviewed article titled “Exposure to Social Engagement Metrics Increases Vulnerability to Misinformation.”
The study found that the lower the credibility of a post, the higher its various social engagement metrics such as “likes” or shares were, and this made people more prone to like or share it and less likely to fact-check it.
The researchers in the study designed a news literacy game simulating a social media feed on a platform similar to Facebook or Twitter, and collected data from more than 8,500 accounts. It was conducted from May 2018 to November last year.
None of the findings were new to the purveyors of misinformation and content farms: It is the reason fake accounts bloat the numbers of “likes” and amount of times an article is shared, regardless of what algorithm is used.
The study highlights the herd mentality aspect of human nature, in which people think that if everyone does a certain thing, then it does not matter if they do it, too, and that the responsibility of the action is shared between all involved.
When the number of people involved reaches a certain level, the individual feels free from all responsibility for the outcome. Therefore, the more people share or like a post, the less it matters if an individual follows suit.
Chains of transmission on social media rely on interactions between people, and naturally the transmission chain of false news reports is no exception.
If people feel no responsibility for liking or sharing, they do not have to think about it, and do so almost as a knee-jerk reaction.
This is, of course, perfect for disseminating misinformation.
It is precisely because social media users and the original posters are links in the chain that they bear a share of the responsibility. Do not pass the buck onto news media or media workers.
It is the responsibility of everyone to ask themselves whether they have shared articles from an unknown source, or whether they have shared them without knowing whether they were genuine.
People should ask themselves whether they have the ability or the willingness to fact-check a suspect article before they pass it along, and whether they are willing to accept responsibility for having done so.
The Taiwan FactCheck Center has been promoting fact-checking tools that people who want to use social media responsibly can employ, and which are no more difficult to use than search engines.
If people can establish a sense of responsibility in how they engage with social media, as well as use some basic fact-checking techniques, rather than hiding behind the herd, perhaps they could, even in a small way, mitigate the polarization of society that social media are perpetuating.
Chang Yueh-han is an adjunct assistant professor of journalism at Shih Hsin University.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry