We need to talk about fake news. Fake news is a term used to describe any type of intentionally fraudulent media publication with the purpose of misleading the public or profiting off of reader gullibility.
The Washington Post published an article earlier in 2016 highlighting Paul Horner, a 38-year-old fake news influencer who publishes his stories on Facebook for profit. His articles have been presented as news on Google in a very convincing manner, and even tweeted out by one of Donald Trump's campaign managers at the time.
Fake news isn't a new concept, nor is it a new practice in the context of swaying politics. I remember learning about "Yellow Journalism" in the 19th century and how that affected the dawning of the Spanish-American war, known as the first media war. Hyperboles blamed Spanish forces for the sinking of an American battleship, urging public opinion to sway in favor of war against Spain.
But, why does this matter? BBC Brazil reported that following the 2016 impeachment of their then President Dilma Rousseff, 60% of the most-shared Facebook articles concerning the impeachment were false. Fraudulent articles about the 2016 American Presidential Election were used by Chinese officials as examples for pro-internet-censorship arguments. If the fact that people, worldwide, can be so easily swayed by unsupported headlines (yes, headlines alone) doesn't raise concern about the state of public knowledge, let me paint a picture for you.
Most people in developed countries get their news from the internet. It's convenient, it shows up on our social media websites, and it makes us feel informed about life outside of ourselves. I remember a popular pastime in my internet-aged childhood was going to Snopes.com and seeing which playground rumors about Walt Disney were true, and which ones were false. I had no idea I was unintentionally fact-checking as an eight-year-old. While many people consider themselves to be wise in terms of detecting journalistic bias, that is not the case for everyone, obviously. Some may be mistaking their eye for bias with their eye for consistency.
Unfortunately, this is how people are tricked into believing fraudulent news stories. If a website looks reputable, has news stories that seem to be true, and follow a consistent political leaning, many will trust it when it supports their views. I go to school in a cornfield in Minnesota, and I live in the heart of Chicago. During the six-plus hour drive back home for the holidays, something dawned on me that I hadn't thought about in a long time, not since my first taste of culture shock going to downstate Illinois for the first time. The sudden realization that, yes, most of the United States looks like a vast expanse of land, with no signs of human life outside of those you are already familiar with, or better yet, inhabiting. Imagine that isolation compounded with real-time knowledge of the world's happenings outside of your suburb or small town spoon-fed through television, radio, and the internet. Everyday occurrences are never reported, never have been, and probably never will be. Everything reported in the media, whether a positive or negative story, is the exception to the rules we deem "normal".
Why are there no consequences for these influencers? I've wondered this ever since I first learned about this phenomenon. With the amount of agency they seem to have on public opinion, why aren't government bodies getting
