TED Talk
Senior Thesis
What role, if any, does fake news play in American politics, specifically the 2017 presidential election?
Henry Isenberg
Senior Project Advisor: Ally Johnson
12th Grade Humanities Animas High School 27 Feruary 2017
Part 1: Introduction
The 2017 presidential election was a historic one, not just because of the unexpected outcome, but also the rise of fake news. Taking shape primarily through Facebook, fake news sites receive circulation and viewership similar to that of credible sources, such as The New York Times or The Washington Post . As people scramble to find something to blame for the outcome of the election, evidence has yet to present itself in favor of fake news having any meaningful influence on the election. President Donald Trump has joined in on the debate of what we could do about fake news, and has his own definition of what qualifies as fake news. But even if fake news had no influence on the election, public skepticism toward news is growing, shifting the debate from interpretations of facts, to arguments of the facts themselves. While not directly influencing the election, fake news has polarized both sides of the political aisle, catering to what both conservative and liberal readers want to believe, instead of what is actually true.
Part 2: Historical Context
Occurring more frequently than we realize, fake news often takes place in the form of misleading and sensationalized articles, many times many times being referred to as Yellow Journalism. Yellow journalism transcends politics, spreading to pop culture and even athletes with exaggerated versions of the truth. Tiger Woods fell victim to these exaggerations after his affairs in 2013, news outlets interviewed sex addicts, comparing them to the golf sensation. (People Magazine) But pop-culture and sports do not have as great of an impact on society as misleading political journalism. Taking advantage of our political landscape, fake news and yellow journalism have more recently taken over the 2016-2017 presidential election in the
United States, with swarms of fake articles being shared on Facebook millions of times, sometimes more so than the likes of The New York Times or The Washington Post.
Fake news, in its simplest form, is effectively propaganda. And while the President might not have been Tweeting about it, it has been around a while. Dating back to the Catholic Church during the Reformation in the 1500s, propaganda was used as a way for the church to make money. Persuading the richest members of society to buy their way into a high ranking position, the Church had convinced society it was the most sure way to be granted into heaven. Much of the propaganda used by the Church was very similar to the way fake news is today, containing some form of fact or truth, but skewing it until it is mostly false.
Today, taking advantage of the internet age, fake news uses social media as its catalyst. Creating misleading titles for articles known as "clickbait", fake news is able to be read, shared, and re-read hundreds of thousands of times. After misleading information is spread at such a high volume, and the unexpected outcome of the 2017 United States presidential election, fake news is often a target of blame, but just how grounded is that blame?
Part 3: Research and Analysis
Almost half of American adults’ primary source for viewing news is through social media, specifically Facebook. Whether readers are careful of what they read and share or not, it
is likely they will stumble across some form of fake news. Most fake news articles and websites do not have the intention of influencing the opinions of its readers, but instead have a goal to make money, just as any other news outlet does. As a result, most fake news articles boast headlines such as, "Trump Offering Free One-Way Tickets to Africa & Mexico for Those Who Wanna Leave America.”(Tiffany) An average reader even clicking on the article, thinking it would be worth the read, has unintentionally helped the website achieve its goal of getting circulation. Going a step further, some of its readers may even believe the contents of the article, prompting them to share it with their Facebook friends, starting the cycle all over again. As said in “How to stamp out fake news” in an issue of Scientific American, “If last fall’s election will go down in history as the Election of Unintended Consequences, those fake stories are no exception. They wound up circulating copiously on Twitter and Facebook; on the latter, the top-20 fake stories actually triggered more clicks than the top-20 real ones. Fake news became fodder for ugly partisan warfare online, too. Worst of all, it might have affected the presidential election results. Remember, 44 percent of US adults get their news from Facebook. ”(Pogue) This is not to say that Facebook or even social media is the problem, social media is also a medium for real news to be spread. What this does mean is people share news articles with catchy titles that they happen to agree with, some not even reading the contents of the article before sharing.
The result of fake news is often not the expected one. While not directly influencing the election, debate surrounding policy of candidates has already started to shift. Debates are based on fact, and while the interpretations and consequences these facts imply may vary, the facts have always remained consistent. This was the case until the 2017 Presidential debates. Donald
Trump, often thought to be the frontrunner of the Obama birther conspiracies, was asked about those claims in one of these said debates. But instead of admitting his wrong doings, or admitting the conspiracy could have been a result of misinformation, he used this false information to strengthen himself, saying, “...And I think I did a great job and a great service not only for the country, but even for the president, in getting him to produce his birth certificate.” (Trump) Statements like these from a future president, while not solely responsible, are not only endorsements of falsehood, but one of the many reasons fake news is so commonly believed and shared amongst friends.
Fake news is not only a source of falsehoods, it is an opportunity to make money-a lot of money. With fake news sites setting up advertisements when readers view the article, and receiving circulation thousands of times per day, the motivation to create fake news is there, regardless of the detrimental impacts it can have on politics or society. When asked how much money he could make from such a business, Paul Horner, a political fake news writer responded, “I make like $10,000 a month from Adsense,” (Silverman), more than the average salary of a journalist at The New York Times , which amounts to roughly half of what some fake news writers can accumulate. When thinking of a publication like The New York Times, it’s hard to imagine anything could get more circulation, but from August of 2016 until voting day of the 2017 presidential election, fake sites got more circulation on Facebook than the most popular
articles from, say, The New York Times, or The Washington Post .
With an active social media presence unlike anything the United States has seen from a president before, President Trump has an opportunity to connect with the American people in ways that were unprecedented just a few years ago. This connection, albeit has positive potential, has had its share of detrimental impacts. Soon after his election, Presidents Trump’s approval rating declined, but he still sent tweets that read, “Any negative polls are fake news, just like the CNN, ABC, NBC polls in the election. Sorry people want border security and extreme vetting.” (@realDonaldTrump) Words like these are contagious to his supporters, prompting replies such as “Amen to that Mr. President!” (@saying_peace), or “stay strong President Trump. You’re doing awesome!” (@proudtrumpRN), spreading the idea that credible sources are intentionally publishing falsehoods. Those aren’t the only ones spreading these messages from the president, though. A tweet like this, however controversial, The social media presence of the current President has not just been used to spread false news—it is being used to create it. But because so many of his supporters have social media platforms, many share these types of ideas, creating a new sense of cautiousness toward what was previously thought to be reliable news coverage.
Because of the President's’ active confusion and misinterpretation of fake news, public skepticism to journalism and news has increased, with a large amount of American people not knowing which news source to believe, even when involving the major news outlets. While a large amount of people are far too skeptical of news, a different, smaller group of the population is not skeptical enough, often sharing fake news on social media, or only reading headlines to form their opinion on a subject and prompt their share. This smaller group may be growing, studies have shown that fake news articles have gotten more attention through comments, shares, and likes on Facebook than similar articles from credible sources. And despite that same skepticism may contribute not believing the news, most Americans think they can spot which news is fake, and more importantly, which is true. But because of the volume these fake news sites continue to receive, these claims just cannot be true.
These stories, though, do not cater to opposing views in hopes to convert them, but rather polarize pre-existing ideologies. As said in Fake News Freakout , “When my father-in-law read on Facebook that Barack Obama once worked as a gay prostitute, it did not change his view of the president. He was already convinced that Obama had a shrouded past and that the president did not share his values. The prostitution story reinforced my father-in-law’s views, but it did not create them. Fake political news tends to preach to the choir.” (Uscinski, 56) These articles do not underestimate the cautiousness of readers, especially those who would immediately disregard the source because of the differing opinions it carries. What fake news does well is identifying its audience; authors know they are not going to be changing opinions with their writing. They do, however, write with the intention of catching readers that have the same pre-existing opinion of the fake article, knowing it may prompt a quick share.
Fake news occurs on all sides of the political spectrum, but has never had the intention or result of converting or creating new opinions. As expressed in the Fake News Freakout quote, The article was written with the intent to be shared thousands of times, and, in turn, make money. The subject matter of the article clearly catered to a more conservative audience, or, at the very least, those who were not in support of Barack Obama. While the author of the article may not have had the raw intention of persuading a group of people in a certain direction, fake news such as this has the unexpected consequence of polarizing each side of the political spectrum further into itself.
Part 4: Conclusions
Without proper studies being conducted to this point, the claim that fake news had implications on the election is almost baseless. This is not to say fake news will not have a large and lasting impact on the way politics will play out in the future. With tweets sent out from President Trump stating, "Any negative polls are fake news, just like the CNN, ABC, NBC polls in the election," (@realDonaldTrump) assumptions can be made about the future impacts even the misunderstanding of fake news can have on the population.
With typical elections, there are several debates between the two main presidential candidates, with topics ranging from gun-control to health care. Despite the vast range of topics and policy debated, they all have one thing in common: each candidate uses their own interpretation of facts to support their argument, but the facts remain consistent. But with the skepticism toward the media and journalism as a whole, debates have shifted from debate of interpretations, to debate of the facts themselves. For example, if there are conflicting views of
what should qualify someone to run for president, but one person believes Barack Obama was born outside of the United States, the debate is no longer about interpretations of facts, or even opinions because each side has conflicting view of what is and is not true.
But the spread of fake news does not have to continue. Asking yourself questions when viewing news, especially when receiving it through Facebook or other forms of social media, are vital in the role in stopping the spread of fake news. Questions such as: Is this a source I recognize? If so, is this a source I can trust? What pre-existing biases, if any, does this source portray? What is the angle of this article? Does this article have real sources? Are they using the data and quotes in an honest and consistent way? These questions, while simple, play a large part in preventing fake news from getting circulation.
While fake new has and will have many lasting effects on the way people debate and view news, evidence in favor of it having a real impact on the election does not yet exist. When people view news that is negative towards the side they support, they are skeptical of it to begin with, even when the news is true. Rather, fake news influences people in a different way. Someone who was critical of President Barack Obama would most likely prefer to read articles that negatively impact him, true or not, and would be skeptical of positive news of Obama. But the positive articles will not resonate with him, or change his view of the former president. Instead, he will be further polarized into his own side because, in the end, people believe what they want to believe.
Works Cited
Blake, Aaron. "The First Trump-Clinton Presidential Debate Transcript, Annotated." The
Washington Post . WP Company, 26 Sept. 2016. Web. 27 Feb. 2017.
Ohlheiser, Abby. "Analysis | This Is How Facebook’s Fake-news Writers Make Money." The
Washington Post . WP Company, 18 Nov. 2016. Web. 27 Feb. 2017.
Pogue, David. "How to Stamp Out Fake News." Scientific American . N.p., Feb. 2017. Web. "Propaganda during the Reformation." Wikipedia . Wikimedia Foundation, 27 Jan. 2017. Web.
27 Feb. 2017.
@realDonaldTrump. "Any Negative Polls Are Fake News, Just like the CNN, ABC, NBC Polls
in the Election. Sorry, People Want Border Security and Extreme Vetting." Twitter .
Twitter, 06 Feb. 2017. Web. 27 Feb. 2017.
"Salary: Journalist in New York City, NY." Glassdoor . N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2017. Silverman, Craig. "This Analysis Shows How Viral Fake Election News Stories Outperformed
Real News On Facebook." BuzzFeed . N.p., 16 Nov. 2016. Web. 27 Feb. 2017.
Staff, People. "BUZZ: Has Tiger Woods Checked into Sex Rehab?" PEOPLE.com . Time Inc, 12
Jan. 2010. Web. 27 Feb. 2017.
Tiffany, Kaitlyn. "The Top Fake News Stories of 2016 Were about the Pledge, Poop, and the
Pope." The Verge . The Verge, 30 Dec. 2016. Web. 27 Feb. 2017.
Uscinski, Joseph E. "Fake News Freakout." Reason.com . N.p., 05 Feb. 2017. Web. 27 Feb. 2017.