So-called "fake news" sites have been front-and-center during the recent presidential election drama. The viral spread of rumors, conspiracy claims, and outright falsehoods, coupled with the instantaneous viral reach of Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms, arguably played a significant role in the rise and fall of countless political candidates.
The typical assumption is that fake news sites so easily sway beliefs and opinions because people are perhaps uneducated, ill-informed, or unable to process/interpret complex information. But in the majority of cases, we are persuaded by such sites because we want to be persuaded--better known as confirmation bias. Media consumers tend to view themselves as scientists when evaluating a given issue or claim--objectively and logically analyzing the pros and cons of the topic. But in reality, we are frequently like lawyers, gathering evidence to build a case supporting deeply-held and preconceived beliefs. As Agustin Fuentes, chair of anthropology at the University of Notre Dame noted in a recent San Francisco Chronicle article --"We love when people tell us that we're right and we're OK." Fuentes states that fake news sites are "all about making people feel OK. It justifies their fears. It validates them."
Fake news sites generally emulate the look-and-feel of mainstream news sources that are vetted by teams of researchers, writers, and editorial staff. In this way, ersatz sites acquire a misleading sense of gravitas and believability. Couple this illusion of authority with the hard-wired human tendency to trust information from in-group associations--friends, and friends-of-friends, and those who "think like me." Then add the instantaneous viral reach of social media, and we are suddenly confronted with an unprecedented phenomenon--capable of swaying political elections, inspiring terrorist acts, and spreading dangerous falsehoods. Those with malicious intent are literally able to hack human psychology with the ease of a single social media post.
In past articles, we have explored the power of story throughout human history, as well as recent studies that indicate a specific brain region for processing narrative stories (particularly those with elements of a moral quandary). Human beings have always longed for more than just facts and data alone. Stories, myths, and narratives are woven into our cultural heritage, and have guided us as a species in processing the many challenges of being human--from love, to triumph, to defeat, to birth, and to death.
Religious historian Karen Armstrong notes that human societies once better recognized and integrated the respective power of mythos (exploring the elusive aspects of human experience through story), and logos (exploring the physical world through reason and science). But in the modern era, we have greatly lost an appreciation of the profound human need for stories, myths, and narratives. And that is arguably part of the almost irresistible lure of fake news sites--particularly in an era filled with complex challenges and global threats.
It is difficult to overestimate the historical power of stories and narratives as vehicles for processing (and even transforming) our world. Martin Luther King brilliantly framed the 1960s Civil Rights movement via a biblical narrative of an oppressed people having "seen the promised land" of freedom and equality. And with his novel, A Christmas Carol, Charles Dickens focused a timeless and transformational light on the suffering of the urban poor. But human history is also rife with darker uses of narrative framing--from early America's "manifest destiny," to Nazi Germany's "master race," to the imagined "caliphate" of ISIS. As Kurt Vonnegut noted in his novel Mother Night—“We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful what we pretend to be."
At their core, fake news sites are simply purveyors of stories--but in the misleading guise of presenting facts. We must learn to better distinguish between the two, particularly in an era where even tech savvy millennials can easily be fooled. It's no wonder that fact-checking sites like Snopes and PolitiFact have become an explosive industry, particularly during election seasons. And while some may accuse such sites of having their own inherent biases, they at least cite mainstream sources used to explore a given issue.
The corollary danger of fake news sites is that they not only spread falsehoods, but also create mistrust in the entire notion of truth—leading some readers to doubt everything, including rigorously vetted news sources. Tech companies like Facebook and Google are increasingly recognizing the power of their social media platforms as vehicles for the spread of overt misinformation, or dangerously misleading narratives. As a first-response solution, a team of college students recently developed a Google browser extension called FiB. The free facility tags news links in Facebook posts as either "verified" or "not verified"--and for suspect links, offers a summary of the topic from more credible sources.
Story and myth can be wondrously reflective and transformative--whether through the big-screen exploits of heroes battling the forces of darkness, to the motivational powers of Games for Change, to the online altruism of Cyberheroes. We possess brain centers that are designed for both highly logical analysis, and for the processing of emotionally/morally charged stories and narratives. Our challenge as a species, particularly in an era of instantaneous and global social media, is to better recognize the powers, limitations, and dangers of each.
Michael and Steven Meloan are authors of The Shroud, a science-adventure novel exploring the spiritual impulse, tribalism and its manifestations in human behavior, and the intersection between science and spirituality: