How to verify a media source
In this vast information highway we find ourselves on, there’s been much talk about “fake news” and what exactly that means. Is it information you don’t agree with? Is it literally everything in the mainstream? Should we all become like Mulder from The X-Files and vow to Trust No One? Our first amendment makes it clear that under most circumstances, anyone can legally say anything. It doesn’t, however, mean that those things aren’t complete garbage. Here’s some tips on how to distinguish fantasy from reality.
Google the outlet
Yes, research the research! What score does it get on the liar liar pants on fire scale? Does the publication issue corrections? Do they have a dedicated fact checking team? Or has their CEO said things like “who’s to say what’s the truth.” Facts are different from opinions. If you can’t back up your statement with reputable studies or if your claim falls apart at the slightest bit of scrutiny, your opinion is what we would generously call uniformed. Other questions to ponder are things like does this outlet attempt to present multiple sides of a story? Or does it give voice to just one perspective? Trustworthy sources of information will both include balanced coverage and be subject to corrections.
Who is the author?
Are they a journalist or a commentator? Journalists generally have ethical standards which make them beholden to the truth. As part of their job, they follow up on and read multiple sources of information in their entirety. When reporting, they often have to address many different angles on the same issue. Commentators state their opinions which can be based on verified studies and reporting, but not necessarily. What is the author’s background? Are they critical of their own political party? Chris Wallace of Fox News is a great example of a journalist who has obvious conservative bias. It doesn’t stop him from telling the truth.
What is their motivation?
Why is this person saying what they are saying? Do they freely admit to their partiality? Journalists, anchors, and commentators are all people therefore they are going to have a perspective. There is no such thing as objective journalism, because humans are not objective. They aren’t omniscient beings. They have backgrounds and experiences which have shaped their views. Also, there are commentators who get paid millions of dollars so that people will watch their show-they don’t always have your best interests at heart. And, what they’re saying might not necessarily reflect their own opinion, rather they simply want to increase their ratings or clicks.
Our brains simply haven’t evolved to process the amount of information we receive on an hourly basis. And there’s evidence that the more someone sees and hears something, regardless if it’s true or not, the more likely they are to believe it. The key seems to involve a combination of sustained attention to detail and nuance as well as the ability to interrogate our own biases. And yes, it’s unfortunate the way that cable news is set up to essentially be click bait. News that’s sensationalized doesn’t mean that the coverage is completely without merit. It just means that there’s a profit motive-to get as many viewers as humanly possible so their advertisers will be satisfied. The same can be said of social media companies. Some of the information out there is complete trash and some of it isn’t. You just have to think critically anytime you run across a meme or an article. If you want a more comprehensive list on how to distinguish fact from fiction in your news diet, Lexisnexis created this list which is also incredibly helpful.
