How do you tackle fake news and disinformation?
Concerted campaigns to spread disinformation present a challenge for many countries and are a threat to well-informed democratic debate. Where have you come across fake news? What strategies are used to combat fake news in your country? How do you recognise disinformation when you see it, and what do you then do with it? Let us know in the comments below.
Through Governmental Funding: Form a non-profit, apply for a government grant specifically to address disinformation in authoritarian nations globally, create content whose specific purpose is to spread the good word about democracy, rule of law, and global economic marketing opportunities via tablets, SD cards, USB drives.......
Dear @maliklaw this is a very interesting idea to create a publicly founded non-profit infrastructure. Question: have you discovered an example for such an effort somewhere in the world?
Ultimately we rise together and we fall together, it's a fair observation that wisdom is the accumulated experience garnered from past mistakes, if you fail to accurately record history then you have a dysfunctional reference and no path to wisdom, also opportunity lost forever.... for my way of thinking wisdom might be a good addition to one's bag of tricks...
In Sweden we do not have any commentary fields on our public service
Hej @Johan68 you are right and not only in the public service, but also private media like the main daily Dagens Nyheter has stopped its commentary functions. In Sweden we can almost talk about a parenthese when it comes to interaction as it only started in the early 2010s and seem to be over now again. Swedish politics and democracy is in many ways still very paternalistic when it comes to citizens participation.
also read foreign news, think along and always consider whose advantage it is if I believe this story.
auch auslaendische News lesen, mitdenken udn immer ueberlegen wessen Vorteil ist es, wennich diese Geschichte galube.
The main perpetrators of fake news are governments themselves, especially progressive governments.
Los principales autores de noticias falsas son los propios gobiernos, especialmente los gobiernos progresistas.
Dear @Fer10 it would vbe very interesting if you could give more evidence or examples to your brief comment
You cannot combat fake news or biased news. It is the cornerstone of western civilisation.
Dear @Hat. Very short but interesting comment. Do you mean that the western style freedom of opinion simply does come with the acceptance of fake news. And what's about government steered fake news strategies in many autocratic countries? How do you combat those?
By constantly educating yourself. Specially in science so that when the moment comes and a bunch of “scientists” start telling you what injections to put in your arm, or else, you know what you are really dealing with. But yes, education must happen before these moments happen and not during a crisis when confusing messages and fear is being spread to corner people to do what benefits political particular interests. Education, education…
Thanks @Emma for your strong commitment to education. The challenge is of course, that even if you educate yourself constantly there remains so much that we as individuals can not understand and where we need to rely to others, even people deeply involved in science for example. In other words: our (self-)education is not happening in a linear manner or secluded space. Thats also the reason that crisis - as the recent pandemic - do trigger not just big investments into new science but also comprehensive collective learning processes. We are learning by failing sometimes.
In my opinion the private person has nothing to gain from spreading fake news. However, Governments and corporations do have a lot to gain from fake news. It would be naïve to believe that governments and corporations are totally innocent of any wrong doing whatsoever, and only have your best interests at heart? There also seems to be a deliberate effort in the media to conflate someone's opinion, that they are entitled to, and unwelcome facts that may disrupt the corporate money flow or effect a change in government. Independent investigative journalism is on life support through no fault of its own, which has led to people doing their own research that may be faulty. Most people are not stupid and tend to know when they are being lied to but end up only chasing shadows of truth.
The simplest way to do this is to remove the money and influence of corporate sponsors. Corruption of the tenets of journalism find their roots in corporate control of media. To just take one high profile example, when Amazon oligarch Jeff Bezos bought The Washington Post, that paper abruptly ended all of its reporting on Amazon's horrific employment issues and instead focused on other companies even when Amazon's behaviour was far worse than that of those particular companies.
Journalism should be sacred, but these days, the only real journalism to be found is among the former journalists of papers like the Observer and the New York Times, who, fed up and disgusted with the fake news they were pushing, went independent.
Switzerland is not different though, as this investigation by the work of the Swiss Policy Research group... https://swprs.org/srf-propaganda-analyse/
Thanks @douglas for your comment and thoughts. There are many aspects which can be criticized in many publications indeed. And it is clear that corporate interests are having an influence in the media industry including your example and the Murdoch-family's global media empire. But as ambitious we should all be in enabling and contributing to the best possible production and distribution of news and information, we need to remain humble in validating the work of others. So for me a sentence like "the only real journalism" feels like a far to categorical and final verdict. Especially if you then also link to a "study group" which use "Swiss" in their name but has a very controversial reputation in the public eye.
To combat fake news effectively, various strategies have been implemented across different countries and organizations. Public education and awareness campaigns are fundamental, aiming to equip individuals with the skills to identify and critically assess information. Independent fact-checking organizations, such as Snopes, FactCheck.org, and PolitiFact, are crucial in verifying the accuracy of information and debunking false claims. Legislative measures have also been introduced in some regions to penalize the deliberate spread of misinformation, although this approach raises concerns about potential censorship and the balance between regulation and free speech. Collaboration between governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and technology companies is essential to enhance algorithms and reporting systems that detect and remove false information from digital platforms. Additionally, integrating media literacy programs into educational curricula is vital for developing critical thinking skills related to media consumption from an early age.
Recognizing disinformation requires a keen eye and a critical mindset. It is essential to verify the source of information, ensuring it comes from reputable and credible entities. Cross-referencing information with multiple trustworthy sources can help confirm its accuracy. Analyzing the content critically involves being wary of sensational headlines or content designed to provoke strong emotional reactions and assessing the quality and verifiability of the information presented. Additionally, checking the publication date is crucial to ensure the information is current and relevant. Utilizing established fact-checking websites can provide an additional layer of verification and confidence in discerning the truth.
When encountering disinformation, it is important to take deliberate steps to prevent its spread. Avoid sharing dubious content and use reporting tools on social media platforms to flag false information. Where appropriate, share corrected information from reliable sources in the same channels where the misinformation appeared to counteract its effects. Educating others about the dangers of disinformation and providing them with tools to verify information independently can also help mitigate the spread of false information within personal networks and communities.
In conclusion, addressing the issue of fake news and disinformation necessitates a multifaceted approach that includes education, collaboration, and vigilance. By staying informed and adopting critical thinking practices, individuals can contribute to preserving the integrity of information and fostering a well-informed society. The combined efforts of individuals, organizations, and governments are crucial in combating the pervasive threat of disinformation and ensuring the health of democratic discourse.
Dear Sarujan, thank you very much for your insightful briefing to how to tackle mis- and disinformation. You manage to describe both the problem and the solutions very well and it would be great to see, if this methodology is adopted in full somewhere in practice and does deliver accordingly. If you have any such experience or example please let us know as we would love to report about it. Best regards Bruno
I'm a Spaniard (Catalan, to be precise;) and "lawfare" based on the sistematic and coordinated publishing of fake news is currently being used to bring down a democratically elected government. Left wing parties are proposing laws to help, at least, go back to some sense of reality. And this, "reality" is the keyword. What constitutes reasonable doubt and what is sheer difamation is the issue at stake. Don't try to convince Elon Musks like those screaming "freedom of speech" in this thread. It's useless, believe me. Only juridic consensus will do (whatever that is or how do you achieve it)
Written information, using the Internet or newspapers, is identical (good or bad). We're in an era where disinformation is a weapon and people need to learn how to protect themselves.
I think that educating the population (starting with schools) is the most important part of ensuring that we are not subjected to biased decisions.
How can we protect ourselves? That's an illusory question if we know how many illiterate people there are in the world.
A good education is a partial solution, but not the final solution.
L'information écrite, en utilisant l'Internet ou les journaux, est identique (bonne ou pas bonne). Nous sommes dans une Erre ou la désinformation est une arme et la population doit apprendre à se protéger.
Je pense que l'éducation de la population (en premier les écoles) est la partie la plus importante pour ne pas être soumis à des décisions partielles.
Comment se protéger ? C'est une demande illusoire si nous connaissons le nombre des analphabètes sur la terre.
Une bonne éducation est une solution partielle, mais pas la solution finale.
In my country there are no fake news.
Great! But is there any news?
Toll! Aber gibt es News?
Swissinfo has given me cause for concern today. The article ""CERN decision a boost for Vladimir Putin"" (and especially the title) is almost Fake News.
This article relays a very personal point of view based on a few researchers, one German, one Italian and a few Russians (and based on arguments that are fallacious in my opinion). I doubt that what is said can be taken as the general opinion of the CERN community. We need a real, serious opinion poll, especially as the subject is so important.
I would therefore urge you to be cautious, firstly about the opinions selected, and secondly about the headline strategy of certain articles (in this case, without taking a step back from a brief survey, or else clumsily provocative?)
Headlines can be a source of fake news, with people sometimes reading only the headlines but allowing themselves to be influenced by them, and then spreading only the provocative idea conveyed by the headline!
Swissinfo me fournit aujourd'hui même une raison de m'inquiéter. L'article "«La décision prise au CERN est un coup de pouce à Vladimir Poutine»" (et surtout le titre) est presque un Fake News.
Cet article relaie un point de vue très personnel sur la base de quelques chercheurs, un allemand, un italien et des russes (et basé sur des arguments fallacieux à mon sens). Je doute que ce qui est dit puisse être érigé en opinion générale de la communauté du CERN, il faudrait une véritable enquête d'opinion, sérieuse, d'autant plus que le sujet est très important.
Je vous exhorte donc à de la prudence, d'une part sur les opinions sélectionnées, d'autre part concernant la stratégie de titrage de certains articles (ici sans recul par rapport à un bref sondage, ou alors maladroitement provocateur?).
Les titres peuvent être une source de Fake news, les gens ne lisant parfois que les titres, mais se laissent quand même influencer par ceux-ci, et peuvent par la suite ne propager que l'idée provocatrice portée par le titre!
A good question, but first we should clarify what fake news is? It is a manipulation of public opinion.
Who is behind fake news? Is it a single person?
No, not really, it's NGOs that fund studies and influence the media through donations/grants to promote their interests.
What can be done about it? All media and universities should transparently disclose who is paying for the studies. As long as this does not happen, I absolutely agree with the previous writer here, follow the money.
On this topic, I also find what is currently going through the media about the NGO law in Georgia very interesting.
Eine gute Frage, allerdings sollte zuerst geklärt werden was Fake News sind? Es ist eine Manipulation der öffentlichen Meinung.
Wer steht hinter Fake News? Ist es ein einzelne Person?
Nein eher nicht, es sind NGO die Studien finanzieren und Medien beeinflussen, durch Spenden / Zuwendungen, um ihre Interessen durchzusetzen.
Was kann man dagegen tun? Sämtliche Medien sowie auch Universitäten müssten transparent offenlegen wer die Studien bezahlt. Solange dies nicht passiert, stimme ich meinen Vorschreiber hier absolut zu, folge dem Geld.
Zu diesem Thema finde ich auch sehr interessant was aktuell durch die Medien geht über das NGO Gesetz in Georgien.
What makes you think that individuals are not trying to influence public opinion with deliberate misinformation? And why is it precisely NGOs and not GO that do the same with 'bought' studies? In Georgia, however, it is hardly a question of transparency than of preventing cross-border cooperation - or how do you see this? Do you think the law passed today in the Georgian parliament is a step in the wrong or right direction?
Wie kommen Sie zur Haltung, dass Einzelne Personen nicht mit gezielten Falschinformationen die öffentliche Meinung zu beeinflussen versuchen? Und weshalb sind es gerade NGO und nicht auch GO, die mit 'gekauften' Studien das gleiche tun? In Georgien geht es allerdings wohl kaum um Transparenz, als um Verhinderung grenzüberschreitender Kooperationen Oder wie sehen Sie dies? Finden Sie das heute im georgischen Parlament abschliessend verabschiedete Gesetz einen Schritt in die falsche oder richtige Richtung?
For example, the statement that NGOs are behind this FakeNews is not substantiated and corresponds to the personal subjective perception of the commentator. Unless you count Trump, Putin, Xi, Lukashenko and the like as NGOs, which would be fake news per se!
Unfortunately, when it comes to "studies", the rule is "whose bread I eat, the song I sing". And these are rarely NGOs, but the economy and politics (or rather the parties)!
Zum Beispiel die Aussage, NGO‘s stünden hinter diesen FakeNews sind nicht fundiert und entsprechen der persönlichen subjektiven Wahrnehmung des Kommentators. Es sei denn, Sie zählen Trump, Putin, Xi, Lukaschenko und Konsorten zu NGO‘s, was per se FakeNews wären!
Zum Thema „Studien“ gilt leider in der Regel „wes Brot ich ess‘, des‘ Lied ich sing‘!“. Und das sind selten NGO‘s, sondern die Wirtschaft und die Politik (respektive die Parteien)!
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of SWI swissinfo.ch. The editors should also bear this in mind...... with 30,000,000 in support from the state, Swiss Info should at least respect the "freedom of expression". After all, Swiss Info staff are paid quite good wages for their work. I am fundamentally against demonstrations of power and the suppression of freedom of expression. Or does our constitution not apply to all people living in Switzerland? Only the diversity of opinions guarantees a more democratic, free and balanced exchange. Thank you pje
Die in diesem Artikel geäusserten Ansichten sind ausschliesslich die des Autors und spiegeln nicht unbedingt die Meinung von SWI swissinfo.ch wider. das sollte sich auch die Redaktion merken......mit 30 000 000.-- Unterstützung vom Staat dürfte Swiss Info wenigstens die "Meinungäusserungsfreit" respektieren. Nachdem das Swiss-Info-Personal doch recht guten Löhne für ihr tun bekommt. Ich bin grundsätzlich gegen Machtdemonstrationen und Unterdrückung der Meinungsfreiheit. Oder gilt unsere Verfassung nicht für alle in der Schweiz lebenden Menschen. Nur die vielfalt der Meinungen garantiert einen domokratisch-freiheitlicheren und ausgeglichenen Austausch. Danke pje
Dear Mr Ern, have you experienced, that the "freedom of expression" was not respected by SWI swissinfo?
The mainstream media can no longer control the narrative and this is a HUGE problem for them. They put information out there and anyone providing a different point-of-view is automatically labeled misinformation, conspiracy theorist, disinformation etc. People can now compare info from a variety of sources and use their own discernment and this is a good thing. I discovered that studying history is a great way to not only tackle disinformation but history usually repeats itself or as someone said "if it doesn't repeat itself it often rhymes." Some of the same methods used today have been used before to hide the truth from the populace.
I protect myself with the widest possible range of information sources in order to form an opinion that is as truthful as possible. A healthy mistrust also helps me to do this.
Ich schütze mich durch möglichst breit gefächerte Info-Quellen, um mit eine möglichst wahrheitsgetreue Meinung zu bilden. Dabei hilft mir auch ein gesundes Misstrauen.
Dear Toby, thank you very much for your brief but insightful answer. Fully agree.
I simply stay away from the mainstream media. After what happened over the past few years and how they tried to censor any opposing views it was clear that something wasn't right. No one was allowed to debate anything they published and that was a BIG red flag for me. Nonetheless, no matter how hard they tried to prevent outside information they couldn't do it. What's more, we're not children where we must obey and follow the mainstream media because they want us to believe that they have a monopoly on truth.
They can no longer control the narrative and this is a HUGE problem for them. They put information out there and anyone providing a different point-of-view they automatically label it as misinformation, conspiracy theorist, disinformation etc. People can now compare info from a variety of sources and use their own discernment and this is a good thing. I discovered that studying history is a great way to not only tackle disinformation but history usually repeats itself or as someone said "if it doesn't repeat itself it often rhymes." Some of the same methods used today have been used before to hide the truth from the populace.
Yes indeed, the possibilities to compare different resources are much bigger today than 20-30 years ago. At the same time are you writing that you DO NOT use media you call "mainstream"; that seems to be a contradiction, but you neither define what you mean with 'mainstream media' neither. Do you mean publications sponsored by mayor political parties? Or private media owned by certain businesses? Who are "they"? Would be interesting to get a better insight into what you try to explain to us.
I only stick to the "mainstream media".
ich halte mich nur an die "Mainstream-Medien".
@Peter Ern....That's your choice and if it works for you...so be it.
Hello,
I'm terribly surprised by the lack of education among human beings. The mobile phone has become the object of global individualism. The world follows like sheep without asking questions.
Our population lacks a valid education to be able to project itself against the computer world which has become a humanitarian disaster.
Information has become a source of perpetual fighting by buckets of people who want to protect themselves.
It is necessary to reduce or eliminate at the very least the use of the computer world and especially on-line purchases, computerised subscriptions, sending money by Internet, different sites and more. These are sources for hackers and undesirable information.
The computer world is not a valid source of information and is always changing. To protect yourself, you need specific training.
Bonjour,
Je suis terriblement surpris de la manque d'éducation des humaines. Le cellulaire est devenu l'objet de l'individualisme mondiale. Le monde suive comme des moutons sans se poser des questions.
Notre population manque d'une éducation valable pour pouvoir se projeter contre le monde informatique qui est devenu un désastre humanitaire.
L'information est devenu une source de combats perpétuel par seaux qui volent se protéger.
Est nécessaire de diminuer ou supprimer au minimum l'utilisation du monde informatique et spécialement de achats en ligne, abonnement informatisé, envoi de l'argent par Internet, différents sites et plus encore. ceci sont des sources pour les hackers et d'information indésirable.
Le monde informatique n'est pas une source d'information valable et il est toujours variable. Pour se protéger il faut un enseignement spécifique.
Join the conversation!