Before the rise of the Internet and social media at the end of the 20th century, when Americans wanted to catch up on current events, they retrieved newspapers from their driveways or turned on the TV to tune in to the evening news. Now, with an increase in the number of online news sources as well as an increase in the various technologies people use to search for and receive news, the options are endless.
Average citizens have the ability to share news with others through social media. Not only do they have access to different avenues to voice their opinions, recent statistics show they also have enormous influence – as the influence of the traditional mass media decreases.
According to a Gallup poll of Americans’ trust in news media conducted in Oct. 2009, 45% of Americans reported that they had a great deal or fair amount of confidence in the media. 18% reported having no confidence at all. Traditional media is taking a major hit. In fact, a January survey by Public Policy Polling found that FOX News is the only major television network with a greater percentage of trusting viewers than distrusting.
Meanwhile, a Gallup poll measuring the number of Americans following political news in Sept. 2008 found that an increasing number of Americans – 43% – reported that they follow national politics very closely. Still taking the historic significance of the presidential campaign into account, Gallup noted that the growth in the amount of news sources on the web might have also contributed to this high percentage.
Additional surveys have shown Internet users trust their peers for information about new products and services over advertisements. In his social media blog, “Socialnomics,” Erik Qualman reports that 78% of consumers trust peer recommendations while a mere 18% trust advertisements.
But are social media outlets credible news sources? What motivates people to trust the user-generated content of blogs, Twitter and Facebook over the professionals? And even if citizens do trust these sources, should they?
From personal experience, I ask myself two questions to decide whether news from my peers and other users is reliable:
1. What is the source’s intention?
Knowing a person’s purpose for posting news is crucial to assessing its trustworthiness. Typically, if a friend tweets or updates a status about a pop culture event, entertainment news or a strange fact, I take it with a grain of salt. Since pop culture isn’t a weighty issue for most, people post updates like these with little thought about the source of their information – whether it is a fan club’s Web site, a pop culture blog or another peer’s status.
For example, in January, Internet users prompted the spread of a rumor that Johnny Depp had died in a car crash. Fans mourned on Facebook and Twitter as word circulated about his death. A search of Johnny Depp on Google trends for the Jan. 2010 shows a significant spike in searches for him on Jan. 24 when the rumor spread. Soon after, major news sources like The Huffington Post reported the claims to be false.
In addition, I take into account a person’s beliefs. My peers with strong viewpoints may post facts from a one-sided perspective, manipulating the information or not reporting it in its entirety. Instead, they present facts that reinforce their opinions.
Contrary to what I have said up to this point, I believe people may have good intentions when they post news. This raises my level of trust in what they report. When my peers have a vested interest in their posts, the information they provide is the most credible.
For instance, after the earthquake in Haiti, several friends posted news about Haiti and ways to help. Many of these individuals spent a couple weeks in Haiti over the summer for a mission trip. Because they had invested their time to help the Haitian people, I knew they truly cared about the victims of the earthquake and would post information about reliable aid organizations like Partners in Health and the American Red Cross.
2. How much does the source know about the topic?
A source’s knowledge about a subject can come from education on a topic, continually staying up to date on it and/or experiencing it.
I am more inclined to trust people who regularly follow current events and study certain topics when they provide news. The updates on the Facebook profile of an economics major in my sorority who follows current events and is an economics teaching assistant are reliable starting points for news on the state of our nation’s economy.
Likewise, someone who has experience with an event is more reliable than an onlooker. This can be particularly helpful when people comment on products and services. For example, I trust restaurant recommendations posted by my friends who eat out on a regular basis.
As I reviewed my answers to these questions, I noticed the similarities to my criteria for a trustworthy news source on social media and the criteria journalists use to find reliable sources for their stories. Social media has eliminated the journalist, and it is now up to the citizen to filter out the credible sources from the misleading.
However, even if I decide a friend or another user is credible, I use their comments as a notification of current events. From this initial update, I check other at least a couple other sources. What sources you ask? Traditional news sources – newspapers, online articles and television networks. I have my reasons for this decision as well.
1. Accountability
Traditional news sources are held accountable by not only their readers, but also by their advertisers and the government. When newspapers print an error, they print the correction to maintain the trust of their readers. In addition, federal laws prohibit newspapers from printing libelous statements.
2. Professionalism
Reporters are well-educated in the field of journalism. They are trained in information gathering and news writing. In addition, newspapers and television networks have a lengthy editing process designed to decrease the frequency of reporting errors. Several pairs of eyes read over a story before it is delivered to the public. Articles printed in The Daily Tar Heel are read by at least three editors before going to print.
3. Objectivity
Newspaper articles and broadcasts include data and several sources from both sides of a subject. Stories typically include information and quotes from at least three reliable sources. This creates well-rounded stories and gives both sides of an issue representation in a single article or report. Also, it has now become common practice to include links to primary sources in online articles so citizens can review the sources for themselves. Traditional news sources are more likely to link to the most credible primary sources – but not always.
I found it interesting that most of the links in a New York Times article about Obama's expansion of healthcare led to explanations about the person or subject by other articles in The New York Times. Even then, I still trust the breadth of articles in The New York Times. Together, I rely on them for more accurate news than a collection of blog posts.
While social media has its upsides when it comes to providing news, it is still ridden with underlying flaws. In the future these failings may be worked out, but for now, I’ll stick to my trusted sources for the final word on current events. And on that note, I’m going to check my RSS Feed.
No comments:
Post a Comment