resourcematters

[resourcematters]

An Introduction to the World of Online News

Fake news. False Media. Lugenepresse. All these things are a causality of human instinct. Further and further information is politicized in the age of technology. News has never been apolitical; indeed, politics has always been interwoven into the fabric of news and information since the first steles of Hammurabi went up in ancient Mesopotamia. Information is power, and power controls the results of the people; what “power” understands that people are easy to fool. Thusly, if one wants to “take the power back” one must know when the veil is put on and when it is being removed. Seeking information from exterior sources is not inherently evil, though it is important to take information and understand the context of its creation. Lately, information has been spreading like wildfire through social media unchecked and encouraged, this is an issue in some regards and a boon in others, delineating the difference is key. This blog hopes to be the blade that carves the line and effectively gives you the power to hold the very same tool.

[resourcematters]

Part I. Biases

The human bias is instrumental to the reason why false media can spread. Media, news, Facebook posts, tweets, they all prey on the human reactionary response. Emotions, whether rage, joy or otherwise shape how one reacts to information. For example, if a bank statement arrives and an unknown deposit for a sum of money arrives with it one might be happy. This is nothing compared to a person struggling financially that receives the same sum, their response will likely be much more emotional. News functions in a similar manner (yet largely on a smaller but quickly compounding scale). Media knows how to use these responses to elicit clicks and views with the end goal of advertising revenue. Alternative media is no different. The first tool is removing yourself from the equation. This is incredibly difficult, but it is an imperative first step. A possible method of this is to think of the knee jerk reaction you had when first reading and rethinking about the exact opposite reaction someone else would have. Another option is acknowledging how you experience the world and looking at it from the perspective of someone who has not had those same experiences and isolating why those experiences make you feel a certain way. Empathy is the name of the game.

[resourcematters]

Part I. Cont.

As a thought experiment consider a farmer who was raised and lives on a cattle ranch. News arrives that a “synthetic cow” that is identical to a real cow in both taste and texture of both milk and body but is not alive has just been created. This pleases a person in the city who is now vegetarian and does not want to harm animals but enjoyed the taste of meat previously. The news report also alerts that it will have no financial degradation on the lifestyle of farming because it requires a farmer’s knowledge of production and will effectively be more lucrative for the farmer and cheaper for the city dweller. The farmer may become uncomfortable with the idea of change while the person in the city may welcome it. Neither lifestyle will change but one takes the news happily and the other more apprehensively. Now think about why the farmer may be uncomfortable with the idea of a pivoting to “synthetic cows” and why their experiences alter their thinking despite the logical conclusion of mutual benefit. If you can isolate a few scenarios, be it knowledge, personal familiarity, fear of the unknown, you have successfully acknowledged the bias on someone else’s behalf. To double down and reinforce this did you picture a man, a woman or a person who identifies as non-binary as the farmer and citizen. Now think as to why you thought this. Is it because in your upbringing farmers were always portrayed as men? Women? Were people in the city seen as less “hard working” and unjustly labeled as “effeminate”? These are all personal biases that affect your own thinking and if you were able to think of some of these in your own mind you are one step closer to identifying false news.

[resourcematters]

Part II. Agenda

No political body or corporate entity is without a plan. Corporations achieve their goals through media, politicians achieve their goals through media, and pundits online do the same thing through alternative media. To visualize this, take the online sphere (Youtube, Twitter, Reddit, 4chan, etc.) as employees handing out perfume cards at a department store. Each one wants you to buy into the product with a sample that they give you, you must decide between which one interests you. The issue is that fake news (most often known as alternative media) is a sham company peddling a possibly irritating perfume that poses as an honest and down to earth salesperson. While the advertisement goals of some companies are easy to spot and right behind the sample seller in glass cases this salesperson stands in front of a dingy wooden crate with a blanket draped over it. Realistically, one would avoid the wooden crate, right? However, the wooden crate is more interesting, more entertaining is it not? There is a mystery behind what is under the blanket. Why the samples come from a crate? Alt news and the actually false news thrives on this idea, the entertainment of news. At the end of the day the goals are the same, make money. Ask yourself then why is this piece of media grabbing my attention more? Is it the presentation? The hosts? The community behind it? If so, go back to point one, why is there a bias that leads me to this media source, and why am I picking the crate over the glass case.

[resourcematters]

Part III. Isolation

A strategy often used by false media is to isolate the user or convince them that they are correct and everyone else is wrong. Variations include involving users in a moral “battle” for American politic or convincing users that the pundit is correct and is being targeted, and by extent the user is being targeted. See no further than the decrying of “cancel culture” which often is a form of accountability where there is none. Cancel culture does not hover like a ghost above those who do not agree. Most usually it targets high profile figures that expound false or derogatory speech within the boundaries of their platform. Breaking a private company’s terms of service is grounds for that company to expel a user, that is a key part of free speech and corporation autonomy. If something is not going your way or if it seems like the media outlet that is the most direct and “honest” is being deplatformed, that is often a matter of a breach of terms of service; usually relating to the inciting of violence or the spreading of false information. No, the former president being banned was not an act of censorship, it was a private company exercising their right to manage their platform, the perfume salesman was choosing which perfume to sell.

[resourcematters]

Part IV. Simple Conclusions, Big Results

Occam’s Razor states that the simplest explanation is often the correct one. This works to the detriment of media in general as they cannot sustain viewership on simple explanations. Truly the world’s problems are complex and intersectional, but the daily run of the mill events are largely not. If someone steals a bike there is 99% of the time no larger conspiracy to steal bikes citywide. All forms of media will attempt to string together a narrative to better keep you on the hook. That is the core: revenue, views, attention, reputation. To advertisers you are the product. To news media their productions are the thing that gets them revenue through advertisers. Alternative news follows the same logic. You are still the product even though the news is not on television. Advertisers still exist in the non-televised world. An excellent way to examine if media is posturing a narrative is to examine the similarities between separate entities.

See no further than the Sinclair media group that owns a large population of local and national news stations.

[resourcematters]

#Youtube

[resourcematters]

Part IV cont.

Once a web of connections is formed one can continue to think as to why it is formed. Simple answers include:

- Inflammatory rhetoric keeps the user coming back both out of a fear of a nonexistent reality and entertainment (ex. Tucker Carlson, Alex Jones both of whom claim their shows are entertainment and no sane person would believe them to avoid defamation suits)

- Getting the user “involved” and acting like their actions matter maintains user engagement (False Augmented Reality type games like Q Anon)

- Lying for political gain (ex. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Donald J. Trump, the 44 Presidents before him)

Then trace those strings back to the simplest and most logical conclusion. No there is no ring of pedophile warlords controlling the world, there are no alien beings warping our reality, most usually the center of human corruption in politics is greed. All these things lead back to an avenue of sustaining power and gaining more money.

Alt media wants you to be scared. Fake news wants you to be scared. Being scared makes them money.

That is why it is important to fight this fear with reality. With research.

[resourcematters]

Part V. Patriotism, Pragmatism, Duty

Many would say that the point of being an American is eating hamburgers, watching football, and singing the pledge of allegiance while waving the flag. This is obviously hyperbolic and anecdotal, but it sings close to the rampant idealism many hold for this country. And this is not inherently evil. Being proud of one’s homeland is well and good. However, true patriotism comes from the ability of a citizen to challenge the beliefs and actions of their country as well as the beliefs that the country has taught them.

“It is the first responsibility of every citizen to question authority.”

- Attributed to Benjamin Franklin

This applies doubly so for media and information. Looking at the work that others have done to verify and corroborate information. Looking at data taken from sources that are usually untarnished by government meddling (third parties backed by human rights commissions, census data, etc.) and making sure that what is being said is true. A friend on Facebook does not know the answers, a random Twitter user does not know the answers, and least of all do people who act intelligent and like they know all the answers. The greatest telling of if a person is willing to change in media or in real life is if they can humble themselves and say, “I don’t know the answer to that, and I acknowledge that you may be right”. And then after that go and research and learn and educate themselves on what they did not know. Maybe they did not end up agreeing with the original point, maybe they changed their mind, but regardless an effort was made.

Do the opposite of this:

[resourcematters]

#Youtube

[resourcematters]

Part V cont.

You will notice that political commentators of Alt Media will rarely say this as they need to appear poised at all moments to not drop the farce of the lie they purport. That is why the onus is on you, the citizen, to question them. You have already done this twice with personal biases, and reasons for certain messages, now bring the same gaze to Alt Media. Look into their claims. If academics are saying that they are false look into why, usually people who study something are more informed than those who spout a line on a web show. Look into statistical analyses from thrid parties. If a quoted line is from a police statistic or FBI case, look at studies refuting that line alongside the actual report. Use the methods we learned here. Why does this person say this? Why would they? What is their end goal? Is it fear? Education? Anger? Is what they are saying true? Do I believe it is true just because of my personal biases and experiences? What can I do to learn more? Using these steps, a fuller picture of the world can be drawn. The world is not black and white, the world is usually not entertaining, but it can be measured and researched. Truths can be derived from the grey despite some peddling it as purely monochromatic.

To reiterate:

Stop the Spread! Inform, reform, rethink

[resourcematters]

Works Cited

Aivalis, Christo, director. Tucker Carlson FREAKS OUT at Cop Ed Gavin For Disagreeing with Him about Derek Chauvin Verdict. YouTube, Youtube.com, 21 Apr. 2021, youtu.be/6nr8WRAsZ9A?t=71.

Folkenflik, David. “You Literally Can't Believe The Facts Tucker Carlson Tells You. So Say Fox's Lawyers.” National Public Radio, 29 Sept. 2020, www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye.

Glassner, Barry. “Society: The Future of Fearmongering.” The Fabulous Future?: America and the World in 2040, edited by Gary Saul Morson and Morton Schapiro, Northwestern University Press, EVANSTON, ILLINOIS, 2015, pp. 183–198. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt22727rx.17. Accessed 19 Apr. 2021.

Lakeyboy, “Lakeyboy Silhouette.png” Wikipedia, 8 Dec. 2006. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lakeyboy_Silhouette.PNG. Accessed 21 April 2021

Levinstein, Leon. Man in Bowler Hat Reading Newspaper and Drinking Tea, London. C. 1960, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

Oliver, Richard L. “A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions.” Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 17, no. 4, 1980, pp. 460–469. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3150499. Accessed 20 Apr. 2021.

“Sinclair's Soldiers in Trump's War on Media.” YouTube, YouTube, 2 Apr. 2018, www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fHfgU8oMSo.

Tumblr.com

Worley, Will. “InfoWars' Alex Jones Is a 'Performance Artist Playing a Character', Says His Lawyer.” Independent, 18 Apr. 2017, www.independent.co.uk/news/infowars-alex-jones-performance-artist-playing-character-lawyer-conspiracy-theory-donald-trump-a7687571.html.