How do I know what I know? Truth is, I don't. I am making the same assumptions as others and placing my trust in certain news sources, and hoping they are correct. In the book Blur by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, they mention the dichotomy of faith versus fact, but I think that faith influences fact. The facts I choose to believe are facts, and those in which I get from people and sources I trust, which means that the facts are based purely on faith. It doesn't matter where I read that information, could be a blog, work, or on television-- if I trust the person I will generally think that they are speaking the most factual story they know. If I have any reason to doubt them, or if the story piques my interest I will look deeper for more information.
Take what I learned today-- that Ex-Patriots tight-end is not only being tried for the murder of semi-pro footballer Odin Lloyd, but also a double homicide that occurred in Boston last year. Apparently he drove up behind two people at a red light, he was driving an SUV with Rhode Island license plates, and shot them both. Now I got this information from a couple Twitter accounts, from the Boston Globe, CNN, ESPN and the Onion Sports Network all on Twitter-- they were all released around the same time, even though the Onion was a satirical network. The facts stayed about the same, that he was already arrested for the murder of Lloyd, but also being connected to this other murder in Boston last year. What is interesting, was that the Patriots are doing a Hernandez jersey trade-back for any new jersey in their ProShop. This act makes me think that these connections have had such a negative impact on the name of Hernandez that they not only released him from their roster, but also are trying to assist the community in trying to release him as well. I believe that these accounts are true-- that he was arrested for all three murders because I received my info from multiple sources-- even though they were all on Twitter! While Twitter gives me the headlines and basic facts-- the 5 Ws, and an H as described by Kovach and Rosentiel-- where does social media play a role in providing credible information?
Where do social media sites fit into the journey for truth? I find it difficult to find a complete answer-- does 140-160 characters limit the facts? or make them even more important? I can't help but think that Twitter does more to spur my interest in current events around the world. where I will see a snip-it of a news story-- just the headline even--I will be interested to search for more information through other news sites. Sometimes I will open ten sites all about the topic at hand and read everything. But at the same time Twitter does not do everything-- if I don't look beyond Twitter I will not get the full story, I will only get the facts that are deemed "tweetable".
This is where social media plays a role-- it is only important in conjunction with other news information.
-Abbey
Hi Abbey,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that “faith influences fact”. Posts by Tim Reed have been making me more focused on bias as well. Combining faith, bias and fact, I am coming to conclusions, but I realize I am becoming less trusting of sources I previously trusted as I am becoming more aware that their intent may not be the same as mine.
I am also following the recent events with the ex-Patriot’s Tight-End. A lot of new information is coming out along with words like “a source close to the case” and “sources have said”. I wonder if, as with the story you mention that came out to multiple sites at the same time, the original source was the same one. If that is the case, can we really trust what all the sites are reporting? It adds an interesting dimension to the qualification of trusting something when multiple sources report it.
What are your thoughts?
I think it could be problematic that sources can be shared by multiple sites/blogs/news reports. The phrase "strength in numbers" comes to mind. Where we may be more likely to believe the sheer volume of news related to a subject.
DeleteThere is also the other side of that, where because there are multiple sites we might go digging for even more information and could find some interesting contradictions or affirmations of the original story.
But I cannot decide what is worse, having one news station as the only source, or having multiple sources from the potentially same original source. At least the latter gives the option that multiple sources could have varying information and we could verify spin more easily? I guess those would be my thoughts-- it is a complicated system. How much do we want to know we are being told one story, or do we like the idea that we could be told several stories?
I don't know which I prefer!
Abbey,
ReplyDeleteFaith definitely influences fact! It is the audience who decides what to believe at the end of the day! Also, we should note that social media channels have a limited number of characters so it is very difficult to get the full picture from such channels. We usually get headlines or opinions about a certain news and then we have to visit other sources to know the whole picture and form a solid opinion.
Exactly! But do the number of characters limit what we know, or give us just enough information to be interested in researching more? I have been thinking a lot about this because I honestly do not know!
Delete