Hot topics click link for more
The French Parliament adopted this past week (November 20) two laws meant to battle fake news, specifically in election campaigns. One provides a judicial remedy for candidates or political parties to enjoin dissemination of “false information” - referred to in France as “infox” - during the three months preceding a national election. The other forces digital platforms, specifically social media, to reveal the financial sources paying for fake news content.
Media regulator CSA (Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel) will be empowered to suspend broadcasting licenses “controlled by a foreign state or under the influence of that state if they deliberately disseminate false information likely to affect the sincerity of the ballot.” Unsurprisingly, this was not appreciated by Russian Federation propaganda outlet RT (Russia Today), which has a license to operate in France. Chief editor Margarita Simonyan called the law “banal, old fashioned and (a) boring fight against dissent,” quoted by Euronews (November 22). Similarly, right-wing UK daily The Times, principally owned by Rupert Murdoch, said the law “will curb free speech,” (November 21). (See more about fake news here)
French president Emmanuel Macron has been pressing for fake news legislation all year and the French Senate rejected two earlier versions. "Manipulation is not only a threat, but a reality,” said Culture Minister Franck Riester defending the laws, quoted by Le Monde (November 20). Opponents of the measures call them “ineffective” and “potentially dangerous.”
The term “fake news” now bridges definition, not to forget reality. The Washington Post (November 7) referred to its usage as “elastic” with US president Donald Trump, widely and often, complaining about any coverage insufficiently adoring. He feels abused.
The epithet slung at them notwithstanding, legitimate news organizations and advocates of real journalism are in search of a solution. All want to move beyond the Macedonian teenagers and, mostly, Russian trolls. “Fake news” is defined somewhere between yellow journalism and propaganda, thriving in the digital 21st Century despite best intentions. Targets now are online and social media.
UK public broadcaster BBC jumped into the search (November 12) with an initiative called “Beyond Fake News.” Across domestic channels and language services of the BBC World Service (BBCWS) were a week of reports and analysis. Media literacy is the overall direction, trust in real news the pathway. Several conferences were scheduled around the world to hear the results of global research. (See more about fake news here)
Alas, the scheduled keynote speaker at the New Delhi, India event (November 12) - Minister of Information Technology Ravi Shankar Prasad - cancelled at the last minute, along with other government officials and representatives of pro-government news media. They were not happy about parts of the BBC’s presentation indicating a “rising tide of nationalism in India is driving ordinary citizens to spread fake news” and that “right-wing (news) networks are much more organised than on the left, pushing nationalistic fake stories further.”
In the midst of its ongoing relationship with fake news, social media giant Facebook announced it is offering to subsidize up to 80 local newspaper journalists in the UK through a donation to the National Council for the Training of Journalists, reported the Guardian (November 19). Facebook executives faced flying eggs last week (metaphorically) as reports emerged the company retained a right-wing media consultancy to counter critical news reports. Chief executive Mark Zuckerberg, reported the Wall Street Journal (November 19), told top staff that leakers would be immediately dismissed. Reports of that meeting were immediately leaked. (See more about social media here)
The infamous Russian troll farm Internet Research Agency may never slip from view. Research from New York University’s Social Media and Political Participation lab (November 19) showed “trolls shared five times more local news content than they did junk news content,” said co-director Professor Joshua Tucker in a statement. “This suggests that attempts simply to fight fake news will not be enough to stop future attempts at manipulating the information environment surrounding elections on social media.” Dumping fake news to local news outlets, said the study, is more effective.
|
