Facebook and Google have been widely criticized for possibly impacting the outcome of the presidential election due to the sharing of “fake news” on the sites. Many say the country stands divided, making the removal of fake news even more essential, enough so that the internet companies have announced they would create a more substantial method of supervision and censorship against fake news.
Fred Bayles, a journalism professor at Boston University, said the act of sharing news has a central monetary aspect, with funding being the first concern of whether or not news sources can share their news to the public. Since the internet facilitated the distribution of news, the ease of becoming a news site has increased in recent years.
“It doesn’t take much to have a ‘news site’ now,” Bayles said. “Anybody can set something up on the internet, but the idea of validity through capital [isn’t new].”
He explained that in the past, newspapers relied on advertisers to gain a footing and attention.
“Now all you have to do is get clicks and the money comes rolling in,” he said. “It opens the floodgates to the potential swarm of not only wrong news, but just made-up stuff.”
Sam Haas, the editor-in-chief of Northeastern University’s independent student newspaper The Huntington News, said to combat the distribution of fake news, Facebook and Google are moving in the right direction by assuming the responsibilities of news publishers.
“Since a lot of the ways that stories are spread are through Facebook’s platform or Google News, these companies do have a responsibility to step up what they’re doing to take fake news off of their sites,” Haas said. “… I think that they have clear visions about being a publisher, and I don’t think you can step into that role and be in the digital news industry and not assume the responsibilities that come with it.”
Without being staffed with properly trained journalists and researchers, however, the title of “news outlet” fell upon the internet companies by sheer chance, said Doug Banks, the executive editor of Boston Business Journal, thus emphasizing the importance of censoring the news available on the internet.
“[Facebook and Google] become de facto news outlets, and yet they don’t have any of the journalistic training or journalistic philosophy,” Banks said. “… I think that sites like Facebook that had not been in the news business need to recognize that they have a responsibility to curate better, more accurate [news] and to become more journalistic in their philosophies if they’re going to peddle in the news business, or get out of it and leave it to those of us who are.”
Banks said that the onus is also placed upon the readers to determine what is real and not, and to only share the news that tells the truth.
“There are a lot of websites out there that consumers of this information could be doing a better job discerning whether it’s fake to begin with and not sharing it,” Banks said. “We all should be very careful with what we share and label it for what it is.”
Adam Sennott, the editor-in-chief of Spare Change News, expressed similar sentiments, but he also said he believes there is a caveat in the solution.
“Until the media finds a way to earn back or get back the public’s trust, I think this is going to be a continuing problem,” Sennott said. “I think it’s respectable that [Facebook and Google] want to weed out fake news, but I think it’s going to be very, very hard … They’re weeding out entire so-called fake news organizations, and the groups that respond to those start claiming bias. That may make things even more divided … That’s certainly a possibility.”
While fake news is still among reputable sources, there are also journalists in the trade still working to uphold a dedication to truth. In terms of news outlets themselves, the reporters are already experienced in writing accurately, as it is a rudimentary lesson instilled at the start, Banks said.
“All of us in journalism are in the business of breaking news very quickly, so we always have to be careful to fact-check what we’re posting on our sites,” Banks said. “But legitimate organizations doing journalism are already doing that kind of work, so anything that comes across that smells like it could be fake, we’re already fact-checking it before we post anything. That’s basic journalism; that’s Journalism 101.”
