Skip to main content

Week 8 [21.05-27.05.2018] Fake news and the information crisis in the age of social media

The internet was conceived in an academic environment. The intentions behind the concept were bold and noble. The ability to connect with others in a blink of an eye quickly disrupted the way we communicate with each other, share information and knowledge. The revolution affected every aspect of our lives. It seemed that democratization of information would only benefit everybody. New, powerful tools were created in order to solve many complex problems, increase our productivity and entertain us. The western civilization has become a so called Global Village with no boundaries with respect to the exchange of thought, culture, money, etc.


However, nowadays serious questions are raised with respect to our safety, privacy and freedom itself - because of the internet and social media in particular. Almost everyone leads a double life, one of which takes place in the web. Our personal information, our thoughts, ideas are all stored, processed and used by the government, corporations and other people. Sometimes they are used in order to provide us with the services and goods that we need, sometimes to take advantage of us, to manipulate us and control us. We have reached a point in history in which it is really difficult to verify a fact and to separate truth from a false statement. We are bombarded with information from so many different sources at the same time that we no longer have time nor concentration to process it and to pick what is really important for us.


                                                            Equation 1. https://www.edelman.com/trust2017/

The majority of the Y generation is no longer interested in printed media, books and hobbies that entertained past generations. The imagination and free thinking is no longer a necessity when you are constantly told what is cool, sexy, what lifestyle and products are needed in order to achieve true happiness. Success is measured in money, popularity and the ability to influence other people. The uncomfortable truth can quickly be diminished by thousands of convenient lies distributed through fake social media accounts. People think that they co-create the reality through the internet and social media.

Can you really think freely if you only get your news from the world’s biggest advertising company? Are you really free from manipulation and outside control if the same company stores and analyses your private communication in order to sell products? Are our leaders really chosen by the people or are they imposed on us in order to fuel our fears, insecurities so that we feel the need for someone who will defend from the enemies we never knew we had?


1)    What information sources do you consider reliable and unbiased?
2)    Would you be willing to stop using social media for a year or longer? Why?
3)    Do you think that social media providers should be subject to heavier regulation by goverments?




Comments

Lukasz Mroczek said…
Nowadays it's hard to have trusted information sources and that's why I often try simply to verify any info I see. For example, if I see that some pieces of information are coherent from different sources, then I have reason to think that it's true.
Be willing to stop using social media?? I'd love to! but... I have no choice. I need social medias to contact with people from university to be up to date :D But after graduating I will try to get rid of it ;)
I agree that social media providers should be regulated more by governments but it's very tough to achieve.
Unknown said…
As it was mentioned in the comment above and everybody else can agree that in our world today it's almost impossible to be sure that information presented to you by online media is true, so you try to verify it or make some analysis of it based on your experience and common sense.
I actually did something like this a couple years ago, but I didn't stop using other social media completely. Nowadays we are too dependent on using online services because this is how we mostly keep in touch with each other and stay informed about events that are happening around us nowadays.
Actually, this already has been a big topic of discussions with recent changes in privacy control and privacy policy after data breach incident involving Facebook. I'm pretty sure that nobody wants companies to use our data in the way that can somehow negatively influence us.
Unknown said…
1. I always consider the fact that every news outlet has a bias. That comes with a nature of running a large, sometimes profit driven, sometimes government sponsored organization. Those companies have often influential businessman backing them with ties with politicians. Some news are more reliable than the others and some are more likely to be impartial in certain conflicts when their interests are somewhat removed from the situation. Admittedly I look up news in content aggregators like reddit or wykop which employ system of “democratic” selection that is susceptible to manipulation.
2. I would, with exclusion of my professional field. It actually could be healthier for me since I wouldn’t have to worry about politics.
3. They already are in many places. It doesn’t seem to work out well for the quality of the news there. Only thing that I would consider be wary of is foreign sponsored organizations or owned news outlets especially if those nations have conflict of interests. Some countries force the media to be locally owned and I think it’s safer this way.
Unknown said…
I think the most precious are facts. Sources of information are focused on so many different aspects of what they provide that it's really hard job to be a reliable in this business. There are news that focus on business, on health, on the planet, on politics. The same raw information would become something else after being digested by each source. It could even become more of an pinion than a fact. This is why I think it's never a good idea to close yourself and go in one direction. The point is, there is no single most reliable super source.
I would have no problem with that at all. I don't use most of the medias now, I'm not even registered, so no pain. I recommend taking a step back to everyone.
I think it should be measured by impact they could make. They've grown big now, so maybe it's time for some more responsibilities.
Unknown said…
Frankly, we should always be careful about what is in the news, after all, it is not known since today that the authorities control newspapers and television, so I rarely watch the news.
Unfortunately, using Facebook today is a must to stay up to date at the university. In addition, using the Messenger is very helpful.
I agree that social media providers should be subject to stricter government regulations.
Jakub Nietupski said…
I don't consider any source unbiased because I am biased and vulnerable to cognitive mistakes. Therefore I try to be careful about everything I read.
I'm not really using social media - my feed on Facebook is literally empty because I unfollowed every friend I have - I use it purely for messenger and student group.
I don't know if social media companies should be regulated more heavily - I probably prefer Facebook to have access to my private data that Polish government.
Foodocado said…
It's hard to say what sources of information are reliable and which aren't. I think we should make a habit in yourself to check the reliability of information before spreading them further.

I would love to stop using the social media, but unfortunately, I can't. Nowadays we use them to communicate with people and stay up to date. What's more, colleagues share the information about university stuff.

I think social media providers should be subject to heavier regulation by government. However, it's rather hard to achieve. There is no good solution to handle the fake news.
Iman Masjedi said…
In my opinion ,actually much better to figure out what is real by searching for the evidence directly. But for general news, what I do is read the same article from all points of view.
Yes, as I lived without social media problems 15 years ago, I would have no trouble now if I do not want to use them for one year.
There should not be any state or person in the sole control of anything.
For me, the best practice is to google every single news I am not sure about. It’s hard to find 1 source of information you trust to that’s why I try to find as much information as possible about the news I am interested in. Only after reviewing a bunch of links I can be sure that this information is reliable.

Actually I had few attempts to get rid of social media but I still can’t stop using at least 1. The main reason is communication with friends and relatives. I still need an application for exchanging messages or so.
Removing facebook or Instagram is not a big deal at all. I did quite a few times and it saved me a lot of time. I think getting rid of everything would make my life a bit incomplete. All these apps were created in order to make people’s life easier. You don’t necessarily have to read all the junk that people post. You may surround yourself with desired information and using social media will be much more "efficient".

As was mentioned above it’s already wide spread but most companies doesn’t follow this. But on the other hand, we just agree with companies’ privacy policy when we start using their app.
Unknown said…
I agree with the sentence ”almost everyone leads double lives, of which one is on the internet" I have many friends who write different stupid things. In fact, they would never say that. I would stop using social media for a year or two. I think it would be very good for me and anyone else. I think that the media should be subject to stricter penalties.
Unknown said…
1. I consider the Internet to be the most reliable and objective. On the Internet, we can find out information of various kinds and acquire our own opinion or the solution of any question.
2. I do not often use social networks, very rarely when I need to connect with a friend with whom I can only communicate in this social network. I do not lead instincts, but in our time from Instagram, you can learn a lot about people and I use it. Most often I use mail or corporate messengers to communicate with people.
3. I think they shouldn’t. I believe the government shouldn't have an impact on the internet. The people should regulate by themselves information which that are posting into it.
The only 100% reliable information source is a personal experience, all other sources of information are more or less biased. I use social medias only as a means of communication and i believe that it should be the only use. I think that there should be no governmental regulations in Internet at all, only the ones that are applied willingly by users,. Internet is the only place in world that is more or less free and even though it is not physically real, governments have enough place to enforce regulations on unwilling subjects, at least leave internet alone.
Anna Koca said…
1) What information sources do you consider reliable and unbiased?
Nowadays (especially in Poland lately), sadly one of the least reliable sources of information is the national media that is controlled and distorted by the undemocratic government. One of the most worrying cases of spreading fake news is related to elections, politics and propaganda. The Internet trolls are hired by the political parties in order to spread chaos and fake news among people on the Internet, seeming authentic, but in reality being "opinions for hire".

2) Would you be willing to stop using social media for a year or longer? Why?
I am thinking of it more and more often, since the information that is reaching to me on social media is a so-called "social bubble" - I know that it is risky to be surrounded only by the people that think similarly and being fed information only from one of the viewpoints. On the other hand, more and more data is being abused by the big companies - just look what is happening with Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg testifying before the court right now.

3) Do you think that social media providers should be subject to heavier regulation by governments?
As commented before, governments cannot provide a solution nor be a mediator in a case, where it is one of the biggest problems. I think GDPR/RODO, so an international resolution, is a step towards better future for the data management in the Internet.
Unknown said…
Hard to say. There are currently many sources of information. I think everyone is good, but sometimes they are not impartial.

I don't want to stop using social media. A lot of people don't use it, but it doesn't bother me and I don't intend to take a break.

Hard to say. I think not. The government shouldn't interfere in such matters. Now it's OK and I think it shouldn't be regulated by the government.
You can't say that all the sources of information lie, but also it's hard to find all the reliable and unbiased sources. For me, you need to have a good reputation and feedbacks to be reliable. I want to stop using social media for year or maybe longer but i won't do it. I'm using social media not only for news but for other proposals too. Of course, our goverment need to control social media but they have no access to make a regulation in a full way.
None! I dont think nowadays u could find a reliably unbiased information source at all. What i believe is you should take couple, most of the time very biased sources and intersect the information they presented to you.
I mean yes i would its not like i need social medias to live. Other point is that i dont use social media to get any sort of valuable information i couldn't get anywhere else.
Thats tricky because waht you are basically asking is : "Should one biased platform by governed by another biased entity such as government?" and the answer is i dont know, and i dont care about platforms bias as long as they dont try to pour it all over my face.
Marcin Górski said…
I think that it's hard to find one trusted source of information. There are a lot of misinterpretations on articles. I think that websites targeted on one are are better than one which is having information about everything. Before reading article, we should verify who wrote that. Additionally, we can meet some bribed websites in the Internet which are giving good opinion about something even if it's fake.
I think that Facebook is not my addiction. I like to use it because I can see some new posts/photos of my friends and it's everything. If I want to talk about something I can call them.
I agree with sentence that social media providers should be subject to heavier regulation by governments. Nowadays, we have RODO and we will see that would it make a difference.
Unknown said…
1. I think that I lost my hope for news which will be a reliable and unbiased.

2. I can stop using a social media because even I have an account on Facebook I don't share any private information and pictures on my profile. I use it to communicate with other people on private messages or on groups. I am waiting for solutions like e.g. "Gadu-Gadu" which will be a global and gives us possibility to communicate with other people without having an account on social media websites.

3. I think that companies which are using our private data without our clear agreement should have been punish hard for it and pay a huge compensations.
Unknown said…
I feel like you cannot trust any website nowadays. The best method I figured out not to be fooled by the media is to collect pieces of information about the particular subject from different sources, then you can see the differences and using your mind try to find the truth. Of course, it won't work in all subjects, for example in these you have zero knowledge, but at least you would have to the most objective point of view.

To be honest, I realised at the beginning of this year that social media services don't give me any value. Having this in mind, I decided to stop using them. After 5 months I can definitely say it was a right decision. I was able to focus on my own goals, I'm not disturbed during the day by shitty notifications and what's the best I have a lot of time for better things every day! I recommend this lifestyle to every of my friend I meet now. There is nothing wrong that can happen when you drop this addiction, so I think it's definitely worth trying.

I'm a follower of the idea that governments should not interfere in the businesses. We all have our minds, and we know what's the best for us. Mentioned example, in my opinion, is not fixable. As a society we are divided. Most of the human beings are sick of self-wealth, that's what we place on the pedestal, that's why there always will be some people who would try to fool others to gain some profits.
Unknown said…
I think that verifying information from different sources is great, this is the way I usually confirm news. I suggest you to choose only trustworthy sources of informations.
Unknown said…
It is true, but you can't be specialist in every subject so sometimes you have to really on somebody else. I think it is really hard to choose your guiding light.
It's great that you tried to limit your connection with social media, I think that everybody should sometimes take a break from it.
Unknown said…
On the other hand, avoiding news and social media completely is not good at all, because you don't know what is going on and what is happening in the world.
Personally I am using Facebook and Messenger only in that kind of things like university stuff and connecting with my friends. I think that someone should invent some kind of alternative to Facebook.
Unknown said…
I also unfollowed every friend I have on Facebook. After this I think that I am not wasting so much time on unproductive scrolling Facebook wall. Now I only follow groups and pages that I am really interested in. Aren't you afraid that companies like Facebook are using your data against you?
Unknown said…
Everyone should have that kind of habit, maybe then there wouldn't be so many fake news in social media. You are another person that tells me that using Facebook only for university stuff. Why we still don't have any alternative app or website for that kind of stuff?
Before i start answering to questions. Is there anyone that is surprised with what is happening? If you want reliable information you have to read free media and you have to be sure they are neutral in their articles or its as worthless as normal tv news.
Unknown said…
Nowadays it is really hard to find reliable and unbiased information sources. That's why I try to follow left and right wing websites. I use social media just to stay in touch with my friends, so if they stopped using social media, I would too. Many people use facebook as their primary and only source of information so I think social media providers should be a a subject to heavier regulation. Trump case or Cambridge analytica scandal confirm that.
Unknown said…
1)None of them. I think that everybody shows situation from their point of view, plus anyway they need money, so everybody tries to thing about money or fame.
2) I have no idea. Why would i be willing to stop? Like, for me social media are no about political news, just about talking with few friednds and watching memes)
3)Nope, I dont think so. Social media should be free-from-control zone. Well, i guess only governments control, some sensitive content should be filtered.
Cecylia said…
For me, the most reliable and unbiased sources of information are independent news stations and agencies that provide information from all sides – for me it’s important to know everyone’s opinion on a certain topic of dispute. I Would stop using social media maybe for a year, maybe for longer just to have a taste of what is it like to get your life rid of those – the simple experience that many people nowadays do not know. Ultimately, I think that all media, even social media should not be influenced by the government, because we all have our political beliefs and opinions and forcing them onto other people through press, television or social media is simply a dirty and very ungraceful move.

Popular posts from this blog

Week 12 (12.01-18.01.15) Are you an early bird or a night owl ?

Owls are nocturnal creatures. They’re wide awake at night and they sleep during the day. If this sounds like bliss to you, then, like about 20 percent of the population who find themselves most active at around 9 pm, you may fall into the same category as our feathered friend. Night owls often have difficulty waking up in the morning, and like to be up late at night.  Studies of animal behaviour indicate that being a night owl may actually be built into some people’s genes. This would explain why those late-to-bed, late-to-rise people find it so difficult to change their behaviour. The trouble for night owls is that they just have to be at places such as work and school far too early. This is when the alarm clock becomes the night owl’s most important survival tool. Experts say that one way for a night owl to beat their dependence on their alarm clocks is to sleep with the curtains open. The Theory is that if they do so, the morning sunlight will awaken them gently and natura...

Week 11 [03-09.06.2019] The problem with ecological cars emission in UK

The problem with ecological cars emission in UK Since the adoption of the European Emission Allowance Directive in the European Parliament, all car makers have tried to submit. Since 1992, the Euro I standard has been in force, which limited the emission of carbon monoxide to the atmosphere. The Euro VI standard currently applies, which limits the series of exhaust gases. These include: hydrocarbons, nitrogen and carbon oxides, and dust.   The most significant change was brought by the Euro IV standard. For the first time it introduced the limitation of nitrogen oxides, which are responsible for the harmful compounds of smog.   What is smog?   Smog consists of sulfur oxides, nitrogen and carbon. In addition, solid substances such as suspended dust (PM). Dust suspend in atmospheric aerosols may be in liquid and solid form. These can be particles of sea salt, clouds from the Sahara and artificial compounds made by people. These compounds...

Week 4 [06-12.11.2017] This is what happens when you reply to spam email.

James Veitch is a British comedian. In today’s Ted Talk James with characteristic for himself a sense of humor shows how he deals with spam emails and why responding to junk messages may be sometimes dangerous. Questions: What do you think about James’s  way of dealing with spam? Why are junk messages legal, even though it sometimes may be a fraud? Dou you have a problem with spam? How do you deal with with it?