False News

                Well, that’s just “false news.” In recent months people of all political persuasions embraced the phrase “false news.” It is a rather convenient way to degrade someone else’s thought in a discussion or argument. After all, what can you say in reply? The information you just put out has been dismissed as false, untrue, fabricated, unreal, or misleading. The person branding your information as “false news” is now free to disregard what you’ve said. After all, none of us believe things that are patently false. Even the talking heads on broadcast media bandy the phrase about rather recklessly. And, as with many phrases that come and go in popular vernacular, the problem lies in a lack of specificity, which we often embrace as a useful tool. However useful this tool may be for avoiding serious discussion, at its core, it remains an accusation of untruth.

                “False news” is not news. Merriam Webster defines news as, “a report of recent events,” or “previously unknown information.” Both definitions imply a foundation in veracity. “False news” by definition is an oxymoron. “False news” is a phrase normally used to avoid calling someone opinionated, a propagandist, or liar. Easy access to the internet, polarization of the body politic, the growth of advertising income streams for internet sites have led to the development of alternative-media which specialize in “false news.” Alternative-media has been around since the advent of the printing press. We just recognized it as the propaganda it was and well educated people did not place their faith and trust in such sources. In recent months such outlets exploited the lack of accountability found in social media platforms, such as Facebook. They lurk in the largely unregulated terrain of the internet. More traditional media outlets, print and broadcast, work hard to maintain a fairly high level of veracity not only to maintain reader and viewership, but also to avoid costly entanglements in court battles over libelous statements. If we wish to understand the world we inhabit, make wise decisions daily, and leave a moderately well-functioning society to our progeny, we must eschew “false news” as deleterious to our personal and national well-being. The problem with avoiding such inputs is that it requires hard mental work.

                Many claim that all media is untrustworthy and that they all have an axe to grind. And while each outlet does have an editorial voice, all respectable news sources largely confine such things to their editorial pages. There are good, reliable sources out there. In fact, most of the well-known outlets are trustworthy. In their editorial sections they more freely display opinion; however, in their news section they take reasonable care to focus on the facts of an event or issue and are by in large trustworthy. Well-educated and well-reasoned individuals, recognizing the peril of “false news” eschew such outlets that primarily traffic in propaganda and innuendo. Instead the frequent those sources that offer complete information. They do so knowing that hard work involved in developing a good understanding of any issue. It takes time and effort to understand an issue. There are very few simple issues of note. Most are multifaceted. Many involve different groups with competing interests. All challenge our ability not only to understand, but also to develop an appropriate response. We find it easier to let someone else decide for us. Plowing through a detailed article to reach a reasonable well-grounded understanding takes time and frequently challenges our preconceptions.

                “False news” takes advantage of our inherent laziness. Those who traffic in such propaganda count on our unwillingness to make an effort to get down to the facts of an issue. They appeal to our prejudices, biases, and narrow-mindedness. “False news’ appeal lies in the easy reinforcement of our previously held opinions. After all, why take the time to read, research, and understand the facts of an issue when I can simply click on a link which takes us to a place where we confirm what we already “knew.” And this is the true perniciousness of such sites as traffic in “false news;” they erode our ability to make those well-reasoned, but difficult decisions, a society must make if it is to move forward. By conditioning us to rely on propagandistic proclamations instead of the mental effort required to understand the reality of our world, they emasculate the electorate leaving us easy prey for those who tell us what we want to hear. If we wish to successfully address the challenges we face, we must wean ourselves from this slothful intellectual torpor and again embrace the mental rigor required to carefully examine issues and consume news.