EDITORIAL - Separating fact from fiction
Barbadians are not using their analytical skills when being fed information, particularly as it relates to social media and other media platforms.
This is the belief of Minister of Education, Ronald Jones, who said as much during the recent Erdiston Teachers’ Teaching College 2018 Graduation ceremony.
Criticising some sections of the media for carrying misleading headlines, he also placed the blame on members of the public who put too much faith on reports from social media. “If 60 per cent of your population takes [what is] on Facebook as gospel, then you can understand what is happening. It means now that education has to work faster, better to clear up some of the trashy material that resides within your brain…”
This phenomenon has been slowly growing and has even given rise to the term “fake news”, which the current US president takes great pains to point out as a common occurrence and source of all his administration’s bad press.
However, though social media has been identified as a major culprit of misinformation, traditional news sources like television/radio news and newspapers also have their faults.
The news is supposed to be a broadcast or published report of true, noteworthy, often current events that informs and increases an individual’s knowledge base, especially with regard to influential actors within a state. As such, the news assists in shaping opinions within the public and creating an informed citizenry. It therefore becomes apparent that the issue of ethics would be important to the providers and receivers of news, and that everyone should be interested foremost in having balanced, unbiased, accurate information.
Unfortunately, this is not always the first priority for news organisations. While some media houses strive to nourish individuals’ minds by informing and educating, all the while acting as watchdogs to safeguard the rights of the public, others lose sight of their professional mandate and seek instead to gain larger audiences by feeding the public a fare of tantalising titbits that may be based on facts, but are far from the total truth. In most cases this is done, not out of malice, but in an effort to satisfy another priority cause – the bottom line.
Another factor that contributes to the process of news “production” is the existence of a gatekeeper – someone who acts during the process of information transference in a news organisation, possibly altering the information from its original state in terms of the context, length or wording, for example. Gatekeepers also frequently introduce their own personal bias to the news, however unwittingly, by allowing individual preferences, beliefs and social relationships to affect their judgement and professional practices.
In light of these and several other challenges to obtaining unfiltered information from news media sources and considering also the advancement of social media forums, it may be prudent to arm members of the public, especially younger adults, with the education necessary to critically analyse the media and media messages being disseminated.
One way of doing this would be to introduce some form of media literacy/education module within the local secondary school system. This type of programme is already under way in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom and, according to the Centre for Media Literacy in the US, aims to “build an understanding of the role of media in society as well as essential skills of inquiry and self-expression necessary for citizens of a democracy”.
This move would go a long way towards ensuring true democracy within a state as the most important element, the people, would be empowered and uplifted to a level where they are fully equipped to make decisions about their livelihood. Media organisations would still remain the main source of news, but a complete knowledge of the process of news production involved would help on the way to seeing the entire truth.