Is It News, Fake-News, Fake-Fake-News, or a Fascist Agenda?

How important is news to the preservation and protection of our American democracy? Surprisingly this has become a salient issue in our nation. While our history has demonstrated time and again that the public’s knowledge and understanding of events, issues, and societal information is often essential to fulfilling and sustaining our freedoms, values and way of life. The media is almost always a principle player in what the public knows or has access to know. This doesn’t mean that the media has always played on the side of the ‘angels’ of course; but then ‘the media’ isn’t one thing and doesn’t exist as a uniform and single voice. So, the media is a construct of numerous entities that provide information to the public or their clientele. It is in this function of disseminating information, “the News”, that they play their role in our democracy.

The importance of “Media’s” role was well expressed in Thomas Jefferson’s guidance: “Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.” This advice is more sage today then when Jefferson expounded it. Living in a more complex society that confronts more issues, in more areas, and at a significantly faster pace than was common in his time; the public’s reliance on the news media cannot be underestimated or undervalued. Of course, there is an implicit requirement for the media to provide accurate, complete and unbiased information in regards to what they report. This puts the current political ‘food fight’ over the media and “fake-news” as a central issue that has the potential to erode a pillar, if not the very foundation, of our democratic institutions.

The “fake-news” issue offers yet another arena where we can test the intelligence that is applied to fulfilling our societal obligation to stay informed. As long as enough citizens can pass the test there is always the hope that they can also retain control of our government; else the prognosis is self-evident like many of our American truths.

Question A:   Can the public trust the “Media”?

(1). Yes

(2). No

Answer - A:  No

Rationale - A:      The answer must be ‘No’ because the “Media” isn’t a singular thing. Even the ‘news media’ isn’t a single thing. So as a starting point, you can’t trust what isn’t adequately defined and general misunderstood in the public arena.

With the internet, the ‘media’ has metastasized into an amorphous aggregate of news, entertainment, political forums, dis-information sites, money-making opportunities, anti-‘that and that’ venues, hate-communities, and a plethora of promotion platforms that present themselves as the ‘news media’. Add to this that these new entities are presented as co-equals to more traditional news entities and the problems should be apparent. The issue isn’t can the public trust the “Media”, but why would anyone trust ‘news’ regardless of source? This doesn’t mean that there are not reputable and reliable news entities that the public could put a high degree of confidence in being ‘trustworthy’.

Question B:   Can ‘trustworthiness’ be established for the “Media”?

(1). Yes

(2). No

Answer - B:  Yes

Rationale - B:      While you can’t just trust the “Media”, it is possible to establish a basis for categorizing various entities along a spectrum of ‘trustworthiness’. This has always been a relevant requirement with media, especially the news media; but has become a more critical and more difficult task as the internet has expanded the vulnerabilities that misinformation purveyors provides and increases the number of ‘bad’ actors that can exploit the notion of being the “Media”.

Establishing the ‘News’ Trust Spectrum can’t be done by one person however, so you can’t do it on your own. If the American people want to retain their ability to be ‘well-informed’ then there needs to be a public discourse on and effort made on how to define and implement a sound and reasoned methodology for creating the spectrum. This is a case of “trust being earned”, and not just once but on an on-going basis.

Question C:   Which entities are appropriate to designate as ‘news’ sources within the full “Media” space? Select those that apply.

(1). Main-stream media

(2). Newspapers (with or without companion web-sites)

(3). Instagram posts

(4). Cable news channels (with or without companion web-sites)

(5). Other publications: Journals, Reports, magazines, …

(6). Talk shows: television, radio, internet, …

(7). Twitter tweets

(8). Web-sites publishing ‘news’ articles (only web-based)

(9). Governmental sponsored or controlled entities

(10). Broadcast corporations’ news divisions

(11). Facebook posts

(12). Comments associated with other “media” items

(13). Any information presented via any communication medium

Answer - C:  2, 4, 5, 8, and 10

Rationale - C:      Items 2, 4, 5, 8, and 10 fall within the scope of being news resources that have a reasonable potential to be ‘trustworthy’ sources. Many of these achieved some standing of being a good source of accurate news over their respective history. But even among these categories the form of the medium doesn’t confirm upon each an authentic ‘trustworthiness’. Demonstrating that ‘trustworthiness’ is an attribute of an entity would be incumbent upon the entity itself, those who claim it is not, and reputable bodies that can confirm or disprove a news item.

Item 1 isn’t a sufficiently precise definition of who is the “Main Stream Media”, so it’s circular.

Item 6 doesn’t constitute a mission or purpose that is assured to be unbiased. Being considered a trustworthy member of this category might need to be corroborated by the entities that are trusted among 2, 4, 5, 8 and 10.

Items 3, 7, 11, and 12 do not possess an expectation of reliability, integrity, or professionalism. Trust isn’t part of that media’s DNA.

Item 9 is subject to political interference and may never be sufficiently free to trust on areas of ‘news’ about the government or government policy. In areas where the ‘news’ is of a scientific nature, the trust-factor is higher but must be examined with a degree of skepticism due to intrusive political interference.

Item 13 is self-contradictory with being able to be ‘trustworthy’, as it would contain information that contradicts other information where only one can be true and thus ‘trustworthy’.

Question D:   What is “fake” news?

(1). Inaccurate information reported as ‘fact’

(2). Information intentionally distorted to mislead.

(3). Presenting a report that contradicts what a politician says is true.

(4). Creating information and details that are not grounded in actual events.

(5). Misrepresentation of information and events that shift what is understood about the topic/issue.

(6). Information from a source that is not ‘named’ as the source.

(7). Reporting information that the public cannot confirm on their own.

(8). Publishing information indicating a government or political policy are violating a law.

Answer - D:  2, 4, and 5

Rationale - D:      Items 2, 4 and 5 are efforts to deceive or distract the public from the truth by providing ‘false’ information purposely. Fake news doesn’t come from incompetence, or human error (like item 1), or sources that are attempting to fool the news entity; these conditions result in erroneous and false news but not because the news entity is attempting to create the falsehood. Fake news is intended to lie to you, to prevent you from knowing the ‘facts’.

Items 3, 6, 7, and 8 would be as likely to be true as false based on the statement. Without an intention to distort, alter, lie or make-up information these are often conditions that are the ‘news’ that the public would expect to be reported upon. Protecting a ‘source’ doesn’t create a ‘fake’ news item there has to be more than an ‘unnamed’ source to make it ‘fake’.

“Fake” news provides an opportunity for those that dispute the ‘facts’ to provide adequate information and sources that would indicate the ‘news’ entity reporting the ‘fake’ news to lose or reduce its ‘trustworthiness’ assessment.

Question E:    Who should you ‘trust’ to decides what news is “fake” and thus what news is “real”? Select all that you should trust.

(1). Yourself

(2). The approving editor/publisher

(3). Elected politician

(4). Public polls on the stated ‘fake’ news

(5). News anchors that present the news daily

(6). Executive branch officials

(7). Other ‘news’ entities that provide news that identifies how the ‘fake’ news was / can be invalidated

(8). Members of Congress

(9). Fact-checking entities, like PolitiFact

(10). Friends, neighbors and family

Answer - E:  1, 2, 5, 7 and 9

Rationale - E:      The correct answers are a ‘collectively correct’ answer set since they do not stand as sufficient ‘trust’ sources individually. Even ‘yourself’ isn’t sufficient except in some rare and unlikely circumstances where you have and possess information that someone else could use independently to confirm or invalidate facts pertinent to the new item in question. Including ‘yourself’ is not absolutely required, although if you don’t know why you trust or distrust a news entity then your judgement on the other entities is dubious and strange.

The ‘collective’ answer is based on the argument and reliance on the variety of sources that are presenting the news item and in aggregate are supporting a view that it is ‘real’ or that it is ‘fake’.

Items 3, 6 and 8 are not in a line of work that lends itself to being trusted. Depending on their judgment that news if ‘fake’ or ‘real’ particularly that involved or touches upon their interests is foolhardy.

Items 4 and 10 aren’t representative of entities that would be expected to have access to the proper information that would validate or invalidate a news report. [Rare situations may occur where someone actually knows something factual but you can’t rely upon them to have the infrequent case of knowing on most news items. Otherwise it would not be a ‘rare’ situation.]

Question F:    Is trusting a media entity the same as trusting its published news items?

(1). Yes

(2). No

Answer - F:  Yes

Rationale - F:      If you trust the entity, what would the reason be for not trusting their news items?  There may be some items that you have some doubt about, but if you don’t start with trust then why would you consider trusting the news items that they present?

If you trust the news items then what would the reasoning be to not trust the news entity also. If you find an occasional items to be of doubtful veracity that may require you to diligently assess if your general trust of the other items is still high.

Question G:   Does the public need to trust our government?

(1). Yes

(2). No

(3). There is both a Yes and No element to this question.

Answer - G:  2 - No

Rationale - G:     The government is essentially the operational extension of the public and the public’s interests in governance. However, the public cannot simply trust the government to operate for and in the public’s interests without vigilant attention on governmental actions and persistent questioning and challenges. The public isn’t supposed to trust the officials, legislators, appointees, or agencies that not American. The best individuals may have the best intentions and attempt to do what they believe is best for the nation; but those individuals, their intentions and their actions may not be in the best interests of the public. Imagine what the normal run-of-the-mill politicians and bureaucrats might do if you were foolish enough to trust them without question.

This should not be taken as a condemnation of those elected to or working in government, only that trusting them implicitly isn’t a beneficial approach to fulfilling your democratic social responsibilities.

You have to hope that your government is striving to do what is right, and you can’t assume that everyone is intentionally trying to act corruptly or harmful to the public’s interests; but you also need to pay attention to what the government is doing, saying, proposing, and hiding as a civic duty.
 

Question H:   Which of the following political or governmental entities need to be trusted to preserve our democracy?

(1). President

(2). Senate

(3). House of Representatives

(4). Governor of your state

(5). State Legislature

(6). Supreme Court of US

(7). State Supreme Court

(8). Dept. of State

(9). Education Dept.

(10). Dept. of Health and Human Services

(11). Environmental Protection Agency

(12). Dept. of Defense

(13). Agriculture Dept.

(14). Dept. of Justice

(15). Dept. of Homeland Security

(16). Internal Revenue Service

(17). All of the above.

(18). None of the above.

Answer - H:  18

Rationale - H:      As discussed in Question G, it is not in a citizen’s interest to trust any part of our government. Rather citizens have to have an expectation that as long as the public is properly informed about what the government is doing, about what is happening in the nation and around the world, and what they understand and believe is a proper adherence to the ‘law of the land’ and our democratic system is being followed; then we are protecting our freedoms. This requires a ‘trustworthy’ news media to be recognized and accepted based on facts that can be confirmed, a record of accuracy, and on presenting coverage of issues that is both objective and non-partisan.

Question I:      Can you trust a government when it is comprised of members of your own political party?

(1). Yes

(2). No

Answer - I:  2 - No

Rationale - I:        Political parties are entities that are not concerned about the interests of their members. This may seem contradictory in as much as the Parties work to tell those members how they will work to deliver the form legislation / governance that the members approve of. But the promise isn’t the guarantee, and their actions do not mean that what they do is in the public’s interest.

Question J:    Are you well-informed and protecting our democracy?

(1). Yes

(2). No

Answer - J:  No

Rationale - J:       Being well-informed has several requirements. It requires:

(i)    that the ‘news’ media is doing a thorough and competent job of presenting the information that citizens need to know and comprehend.

(ii)   that the government isn’t engaged in preventing the news from getting information that is relevant and appropriate for the public to have.

(iii)  that the government isn’t violating the law and protecting the corruption by hiding relevant information with ‘classified’ information markings.

(iv) that the news media isn’t selectively censuring news that would harm it’s corporate owners.

(v)  that the news media entities you choose to listen to and ‘trust’ are agnostic to political ideologies, religious alignments, or proponents of one view on national issues.

(vi) that national leaders are not intent on presenting via their outlet to the news media a self-serving narrative that degrades American values, principles and interests.

Unless you believe that these requirements are being delivered and met today then you can’t be well-informed.