Fake News, Shmake News: A Clickhole Introspection

Palmer Bowman
pb501515@ohio.edu

In a digital world so saturated with fake news stories comes an outlet that ramped up the spread of nonfactual information to 11. I am, of course, talking about Clickhole. This satirical news outlet has been providing entertainment and social commentary for years. In today's blog post I will be talking about how I talking about their impact on the media landscape as a whole.

I will be straight up here. I LOVE Clickhole.com. I think their satirical take of clickbait news is the best out there.  They may have started out as a second page attached to The Onion but I feel they have grown to be an unique satirical entity worthy to stand besides them.

For those of you that do not know what Clickhole does, allow me to shed some glorious light. To me, Clickhole is a purposeful fake news outlet solely consists of attention-grabbing headlines that lead to nothing but jokes. It is essentially a satirical critique on outlets like Buzzfeed and how it is ridiculous to base our news consumption on whichever outlet makes a more interesting or entertaining headline. Some have found the effectively attention-grabbing antics to be nothing more than a mere quick joke destination. While I completely agree I feel it says so much about how far our society has come when it pertains to the spread of information.  It is obviously misleading to mainly focus on the headlines rather than the content but once they get the click then their point has been proven. I find this to be truly genius.

Whether its for the good or the bad, Clickhole stays so simplistic in its approach to critiquing Buzzfeed and the tabloids because that is where we are as media consumers. They realized that some of the most successful websites are releasing surveys like "which Disney character are you?" and are getting immense crowd reaction and clicks solely based in nostalgia and curiosity. To me, this is ridiculous and Clickhole embraces those things in stride.


Its just a joke what's the harm?
Allow me try to play devil's advocate for a second, and see how an abundance of purposefully fake news for the sake of laughter is not always a great thing. For starters, there are still people who mistake stories found on The Onion or Clickhole to be breaking news. To these people's credit, when a media outlet's entire platform is based on hyperbolizing and satirizing the formulaic conventions of breaking news culture, it's safe to say they make it look like the real thing. Luckily the onion has established it's self well enough a satirical news outlet that this doesn't happen as much as it did when they first started but they have always had incredibly biting social commentary with headlines like "'No way to prevent this,' says the one nation where it happens regularly" that harshly and accurately critiques America's gun laws.  With this example all I am trying to say is that people do take what they say with a grain of salt but when the intentionally fake comes close to unintentional and effective journalism the line of what are considered credible sources can be blurred,  I personally think satire is that important that it can blur lines if it gets the message across but I do see how these kinds of outlets don't really help with the end of fake news. But at the end of the day if you believe a joke as fact, then the joke wins.

Picture courtesy of Clickhole. 

The Magnitude of Fake News

Brooke Balzano
bb240415@ohio.edu

Since the Presidential Election in 2016, fake news is something that everyone is familiar with. It is nothing more than a bogus story that gains a lot of attention from consumers who do not realize the source is entirely credible. There are many steps to take to determine whether the article is reliable or not, but not many people read beyond the headline of the article. Fake news spreads easily across all social media platforms, with some companies trying harder to stop it than others.

Both Facebook and Google have played a prominent role in the disbursement of fake news and each have taken a different approach toward stopping the spread. Google has stated that they are removing websites that produce fake news from its AdSense program in hopes to eliminate the spread of the toxic stories. Facebook followed in Google's footsteps shortly after but does not remove the stories completely.

The election was fueled by post after post containing fake news on Facebook. In the final few months leading up to Election Day, fake news stories were getting more attention than factual stories from sources like the Washington Post and the New York Times. Up until August, major news outlets were dominating the engagements on Facebook, receiving more shares, likes, comments and reactions than fake news at the time. That suddenly changed once the countdown to Election Day crept closer and closer, ultimately performing better than stories from major news outlets by over 1.3 million interactions.

Courtesy of BuzzFeed News

Each social media platform also has a different approach to how fake news is handled. A majority of Facebooks highest engagements came from stories containing fake news. Google has begun to remove unreliable websites from AdSense. Twitter has a strong end-user agreement when it comes to truth and transparency. YouTube has invested $25 million in a program with six creators to teach viewers how to spot fake news.

Although fake news is something that seems to have skyrocketed in popularity from the recent election, it is something that has been around for quite some time. It is clear that these news stories have a very strong impact on people's lives and what they believe in, but some do not realize that what is being said could also be ruining someone else's life. The stories that are written directly impact the person it is written about, whether it is a political figure or just an average human being.

On December 14, 2012, tragedy struck in my home state of Connecticut when Adam Lanza opened fire in Sandy Hook Elementary School where he shot to death 20 children and 6 teachers before taking his own life. All the local news stations were covering the event, but it wasn't until long that fake news stories were released. Soon enough, there was a photograph of a girl crying that was circulating Twitter which was familiar to an image from the Columbine school shooting in 1999.

Immediately, articles were circulating the internet saying that the Sandy Hook shooting was all a hoax and that all the parents were hired actors only pretending to mourn the loss of their child who was no older than 7 years old. As morbid as this was, people believed it and ran with it.

David Wheeler is the father of 6-year-old Benjamin Wheeler, who was killed in the massacre. In an article with BuzzFeed News, Wheeler explained that someone had created fake Twitter accounts for him and his wife and tried to prove that they were hired as actors for this massacre. Wheeler worked with Twitter to have the Twitter accounts closed down, which was easier to do than to remove the fake news from Facebook and YouTube.

Fake news is not something that should be taken lightly. It has a large impact on social media users and likely is something that will never truly end. Social media platforms must work to educate users on how to determine the credibility of the source and minimize the number of unreliable sources posted.

The Fight Against Fake News

Ryan Everett
re962714@ohio.edu

There is no doubt that fake news, or at least the idea of fake news, dominates journalism as we know it today. Our President tweets his outrage about it on a nearly daily basis, and many people do not know what news sources and stories they can trust. But simply acknowledging fake news is not enough. What can be done to combat it?

Politicians' Role

It is hard to say, in our current political environment, that politicians can have a role in combating fake news, as President Trump has ultimately led the attack against the media and started the whole era of fake news. But politicians certainly play a role, just not always a positive one.

Donald Trump, and high-ranking members of the Republican party, have fought to expose and take down the "mainstream fake-news media," but statistics show, this may not be working. According to a Washington Post poll that shows who adults trust as a source information, 48% of people said they trusted more compared to 35% who said they trusted President Trump more. Trump lost 45% to 32% to MSNBC and 30% to 20% to Fox News.

However, this same poll shows that 77% of adults believe that major news networks report fake news occasionally, or on a regular basis. This statistic shows that Trump's fight against mainstream media is working to some degree, just not the way he would like it.

But, what can politicians do to combat fake news? It would be easy to say that politicians should come out and give their full support to the media, but that is not likely to happen. Politicians use the media to further their own position, which can lead to fake news. So, it may be necessary to look in another direction.

Social Media and the Public's Role

There is no question that social media has played a major role in the spread of fake news, as any article, tweet, or post can be shared to thousands of people with the simple click of a button. According to Buzzfeed News, the top 20 false election stories generated 8,711,000 shares, reactions and comments while the top 20 stories from major news websites only generated 7,367,000 shares, reactions, and comments.

This number is staggering and shows that the general public often looks for a clickbait headline without digging in to see the merit behind the story.

For a long period of time, Facebook did little to try to slow down the spread of false stories, but within the last few months they have released a new feature that gives more information about the article that was shared. It certainly cannot completely stop the spread of fake news, but it can certainly slow it down.

Another important issue to focus on here is the role of the general public. They obviously play a role in the increase of fake news, as they are typically the ones sharing it. But, again, is there anything they can do to combat it?

One might look at it and say the public must play their role and do their own fact checking to ensure the story they are sharing is accurate and factual, but people are going to share what they want. This is especially true during an election period. Many people will share anything that supports their own political belief.

Journalists' Role

The answer to the question on how to combat fake news ultimately starts and ends with the journalists. Journalists are responsible for the information they present in their stories, and whether that information is credible.

While it is clear there are thousands of excellent journalists throughout the country who do their research and present the facts of a story without trying to alter any details, journalists must continue to work to ensure the information they present is factual and presented in an ethical manner to end this era of "fake news."

Image via dailydot.com

Have You Been a Victim of Fake News?

Kyra Barksdale
kb764715@ohio.edu


Fake news? In my opinion, it's something we honestly will never be able to get rid of. Our society has endless opportunities of finding out the current news story at our finger tips. At the same time, we have the ability to release news straight through our finger tips. These apps, such as Twitter, are contributing to the way we receive news and in certain cases...FAKE NEWS.

I remember a time where I was a victim of fake news. I had just got home from my classes on a rainy spring day. I was sitting in my bed, scrolling through Instagram and I seen a post from this very popular user that is always posting current news. This post had led me to think my favorite celebrity crush was going to have a child on the way. I got to digging to find out some more about this story, come to find out that this news report wasn't true at all. That is when I stood there, jaw dropped and humbled by the fake news this world is constantly giving.

According to nbcnews.com, lies spread faster on social media than the truth does. I totally agree with this statement because it happens all the time to me, my family and friends. Come to find out, people are quicker to repeat something that's false rather than what's true. Twitter is a prime example of this, it's reported that false news gets more re-tweets and likes than real news. One main reason as to why, is because ordinary people are being able to get this blue check mark next to their name; being known as verified. At first, only celebrities, famous people and news stations had these verified accounts. Now ordinary people, like the kid sitting next to you in class, can have a verified account. Those accounts come with many followers who will retweet anything you say and cause your tweet to go viral. That's how fake news is becoming popular.. just through your finger tips.

                  

source: The Nicholls Worth

It's very important as journalists, that we are the ones who are always fact checking and relooking over our stories before we post them, eliminating any reason for our news to not be credible or falsify any information. Social media has a huge effect on transporting news of all sorts. As technologies continue to grow, it's going to be harder and harder to control the distribution of fake news. With this fake news phenomenon, it threatens journalists' credibility.

What is Facebook Doing to Combat Fake News?

Natalie Butko
nb861214@ohio.edu

Facebook faced criticism after the 2016 election for the amount of fake news and false information that was widely shared on the platform in the months leading up to Election Day. An analysis from BuzzFeed shows that in the three months leading up to the election, the 20 top-performing false election stories had more engagements on Facebook than the 20 top-performing election stories.

Since the election nearly two years ago, Facebook has shown an effort to combat misinformation. In December 2017, Facebook released the video below to summarize how they are fighting false news.

The video can also be found on Facebook's Help Center where a page dedicated to the effort in fighting false news can be found. The website says, "We're committed to fighting the spread of false news on Facebook. We use both technology and human review to remove fake accounts, promote news literacy and disrupt the financial incentives of spammers. In certain countries, we also work with third-party fact-checkers who are certified through the non-partisan International Fact-Checking Network to help identify and review false news."

Facebook's strategy is simple: remove, reduce and inform.

Facebook has both ad policies and community standards. Their goal is to remove posts that don't follow those guidelines. Areas that are typically violated when a post is considered fake news include spam, hate speech or fake accounts.

Lots of fake content shared on Facebook is financially motivated. By removing their content, Facebook is making these sites unprofitable. Third-party fact-checkers are a large part of this strategy. Checkers are verified through the International Fact-Checking Network. When checkers rate something as false, those posts appear lower in a user's newsfeed. Facebook claims this reduces future views by more than 80%.

Finally, Facebook wants users to be aware of misinformation and how to report it. In the first image below, the "about this article" can be clicked on to learn more about the source of the article. In a separate effort, if a user tries to share false information, Facebook alerts the user that additional reporting is available from a fact-checker that the user may want to see before reposting content. This can be seen in the second image below.

Source: Facebook

Source: Facebook

Back on Facebook's Help Center there is another page titled "How are we working to secure Facebook during elections?" This page promotes Facebook's three initiatives for future elections: increasing transparency, strengthening enforcement and supporting an informed community. Elements of this effort include identifying advertisements, verifying pages, removing fake accounts and increasing the number of people working in security to 10,000.

Facebook has no easy task ahead of them. As a website dedicated to user-generated content, they are facing increased pressure to be a leader in the fight against the spread of fake news. They have already taken steps to decrease the amount of false information on the website as well as inform their users how to recognize fake news. Just last week it was announced they are working on technology to better detect uploaded photos and videos that have been manipulated. While they have not figured out how to fully eliminate misinformation on their platform, it is evident that Facebook has taken many steps in the right direction since the 2016 election.

Fake News and 4chan: How is False Information Spread?

Shelby Campbell
sc568816@ohio.edu

Following the 2016 presidential election, “fake news” about the presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, ran rampantly on social media, especially Facebook. Social media has changed how information is shared. It has become harder to fact check and easier to publish and spread false information. 

Social media’s influence on false information

Although the spread of fake news is not new, social media has given anyone and everyone with an opinion a platform to spread it. 

According to a Buzzfeed News study, the most popular fake news stories from Facebook during the 2016 garnered more engagement than the top stories from national media outlets.

The ease of access means anyone has the chance to engage with any information. But it also means that individuals have to filter the false information themselves, rather than relying on a few trusted sources to, without a doubt, tell the truth.  

Political ideology influences vulnerability to fake news

Many fake news sources present themselves as news for a certain audience. Fake news sources pander to political ideologies, because, according to a paper by Gordon Pennycook and David G. Rand, two Yale professors, audiences look to confirm their own beliefs by reading news.

That trend, however, is divided by political ideologies. Hillary Clinton supporters, during the 2016 election, were able to distinguish fake and real news within their own political leaning. Donald Trump supporters were less likely to determine whether a story was fake or real. 

Donald Trump repeatedly attacked the American media during the 2016 election cycle, which could likely explain his supporters’ inability to distinguish between real and fake news. They were more likely to believe negative, false stories about Hillary Clinton because those stories fell within their political leaning. The source, in this case, did not matter to Trump-supporting audiences; the content, however, did. 

How is fake news spread?

Fake news runs rampant when a story is sensational. 

In 2016, 4chan, an online forum, spread a rumor on Facebook, Twitter and blogging website Tumblr, claiming pedophiles were trying to gain acceptance in the LGBT community. 

Via snopes.com

The rumor was widespread and reoccurs frequently on social media. The exact rumor and poster were circulating again in 2018, two years after the original rumor was spread. The pro-pedophilia image or content, which has been repeatedly fact checked and disproved, was spread on Facebook and Twitter through individuals. 

Although the information is false, many anti-LGBT groups promoted the poster as evidence against the LGBT community. Because the rumor pandered to their beliefs, audiences were less likely to fact check the rumor. 

Who is responsible for fact checking?

Before the internet, journalists were responsible for publishing accurate information. Because of user-generated content, however, the responsibility falls increasingly on the audience to filter its own information.

Social media outlets, such as Facebook, have taken increased steps since the 2016 election to filter false content. Although Facebook can take steps to prevent false information from being shared, the responsibility still falls on the user to judge the validity of the content. 

Fake news is spread solely because audiences either refuse to fact check, or because the information presented to them fits their political beliefs, and they don't consider the possibility of it being fake. Each reader has a responsibility to fact check information before they share it, because spreading false information is potentially dangerous.

Join the Fight Against False Information

Ally Campbell

Let's get rid of the term "fake news" and call it what it really is: false information, poor reporting, lack of accountability.

Trump has turned "fake news" into a crusade against journalists, calling the media "dishonest, terrible people."

Journalists certainly play a part, but there are many other factors to consider. Our current media environment isn't simply the result of a few deviant journalists.

User-Generated Content
While there are truly awful journalists out there, the media is not the only contributor to the problem and prevalence of false news. In an era of user-generated content and social media, anyone can share just about anything.

Before the creation and popularization of user-generated content, news and information was filtered through a curator or editor before it reached the public. Now, anyone with access to the internet can publish anything in an instant, with or without evidence or support.

While user-generated content does have its benefits, it can produce rumors and cause false information to go viral. This can be detrimental to the trustworthiness of available information and the ways in which it's represented.

User-generated content makes it more difficult to identify the truth.

Proliferation of False Information 
Social media is another major contributor to false information.

During the 2016 election, for example, the top 20 false news stories had more engagements than the top 20 hard news stories.

Source

Additionally, a 2017 study by NYU and Stanford researchers found that over 40 percent of visits to 65 false news sites came from social media, while only 10 percent of visits to 690 top U.S. news sites came from social media.

Inaccurate stories and statistics are easy to share on social media, and many people don't even take the time to read full stories before sharing. This issue and its pervasiveness on social media leads to the perpetuation of false information.

The Need for Better Reporting
User-generated content and social media aside, journalists aren't without blame. As said in nearly every ethics code out there, with some minor variations in phrasing, journalists must seek and report the truth.

Journalists can and need to do better. We must check and recheck sources, pursue the full story, use caution when publishing anonymous sources, consider sources' motivations and most of importantly, stay true to our ethics.

There is no excuse for poor journalism, and we surely can't afford it in this day and age. It's as essential now as ever to take full responsibility for our work, its accuracy and how we represent the information.

We All Have a Duty
We all consume media, therefore, we all have to be more conscious of our interactions with media. Every person has a role in the fight against false information. None of us are immune.

We both produce and consume media. As journalists, we must do our best to provide only the most accurate information and to limit the dissemination of false information. As members of the public and consumer of media, we must do our due diligence as we continue to consume news and information. We need to be more conscious in our consumption. This means taking no opinions for truth, seeking multiple sources and fully digesting what we consume before sharing it with others.

Going forward, it's of the utmost importance the we carefully consider everything we read, write or share.