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.
Is the content comfortable for you? Always think about this. People believe what they want to believe.
自分にとって心地よい内容ではないか？ と常に考えること。人は信じたいものを信じる。
Ideas should circulate freely in the marketplace of ideas. Truth ultimately prevails. The alternative is some kind of censorship, which is bad from the outset.
Unfortunately, freedom of expression means living with fake news and running the risk of being misled. A lesser risk than the certain damage of having someone controlling the debate and defining what is true.
As ideias devem circular livremente no mercado de ideias. A verdade acaba prevalecendo. A alternativa é algum tipo de censura, o que é mau de partida.
Infelizmente a liberdade de expressão implica conviver com noticias falsas e correr o risco de ser enganado. Um risco menor que o dano certo ds ter alguém controlando o debate e definindo o que é verdade.
If it turns out to be fake, ignore it. Before that, it is better to learn to read information carefully, paying attention to third-party opinions, criticisms and comments, rather than simply taking it on faith yourself.
フェイクと判明した時点で、無視ですね。 それ以前に、 自分自身、安易に鵜呑みにせず、第３者の意見や、批評、コメントにも注意して情報を読み込むクセを身に着けておくのがベター。
Your article of 9 October 2024 contains a graph by Kay Reusser showing, in percentages, the main sources of disinformation. The total number of sources far exceeds 100%. This information is either disinformation or logic that requires explanation.
Dans votre article du 9 octobre 2024 apparait un graphique de Kay Reusser indiquant, en pourcent, les principales sources de désinformation. Le total des sources dépassent de loin les 100%. Cette information est soit de la désinformation soit d'une logique qui demande explication.
The graph legend indicates "multiple selection possible". Therefore, if several choices are possible, the sum of the responses exceeds 100%.
Dans la légende du graphique, il est indiqué "sélection multiple possible". Par conséquent, si plusieurs choix de réponse sont possible, la somme des réponses dépasse 100%.
Read news from different sources, not just from your own country or the country concerned.
Nachrichten von verschiedenen Quellen lesen, nicht nur vom eigenen, bezw. betroffenen Land.
In my country, Cuba, and in relation to the Cuban regime, dealing with fake news has been an easy task for most Cubans who no longer believe in the government's deceptions, and we do that by simply not paying the slightest attention to what the pro-government media say here. With regard to disinformation, sometimes we have no choice because they block our access to certain media, they block our internet, they hack our social network accounts, etc. Sometimes in some cases we are forced to use VPNs. In my country something happens, regardless of the fact that there will always be people in any country who publish false news on social networks, in the case of us, independent journalists dedicated to making the truth known, we are the ones branded by the regime of making false news in order to discredit us and also to try to silence the truth. I conclude by saying that here on the island, those of us who dare to expose the tyranny through the news are harassed, threatened and even arrested. Although both are still Fake News, I consider in my modest opinion that fake news from a user on social networks is not the same as fake news from a government, in this case the Cuban government.
En mi país, Cuba, y con relación al régimen cubano, afrontar las noticias falsa ha sido una tarea fácil para la mayoría de los cubanos que ya no creemos en los engaños del gobierno, y eso lo hacemos simplemente no prestando la mínima atención a lo que dicen los medios oficialistas aquí. Con relación a la desinformación, en ocasiones no tenemos opción porque nos bloquean el acceso a ciertos medios, nos tumban la internet, nos hackean nuestras cuentas en las redes sociales, etc. En ocasiones para algunos casos nos vemos obligados a usar VPNs. En mi país sucede algo, independientemente que siempre habrán cualquier país personas que en las redes sociales publiquen noticias falsas, en el caso de nosotros, los periodistas independientes consagrados con dar a conocer la verdad, somos los tildados por el régimen de hacer noticias falsas para de esa forma buscar desacreditarnos y también de esa forma procurar silenciar la verdad. Concluyo haciendo saber que aquí en la isla, quienes nos atrevemos a desenmascarar a la tiranía por medio de las noticias, somos acosados, amenazados y hasta arrestados. Aunque ambas no dejen de ser Fake News, considero en mi modesta opinión que no es lo mismo la noticia falsa de un usuario en las redes sociales a las noticias falsas de un gobierno, en este caso el cubano.
Thank you very much for your interesting comments and insights as citizen of a country with an autocratic government. Of course it makes a difference, if an individual produces and distributes wrong information and a national government through all their channels do it. The challenge is indeed, who and where government-led misinformation, as eg currently in Venezuela after the recent election, is the only information many people have access too - or if there is a broad unterstanding - as you describe it - that the government never sticks to the facts and truths.
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!
Join the conversation!