Iâ€™m very concerned about the problem of "fake news" and what it means for journalists, politicians and the media-consuming public.
But, really, this isnâ€™t a new concern of mine. For many years, Iâ€™ve battled with the concept that the internet is always right.
Increasingly so, it isnâ€™t. Actually, itâ€™s wrong an awful lot.
In 1998, when Jeff Sherman and I launched OnMilwaukee.com, we chose a digital platform not just because we had a crystal ball for the future of media. We also couldnâ€™t afford to print a magazine and city guide; at the time, it was much cheaper to build a website.
Of course, the opposite is now true for us. Our infrastructure, from servers to programmers to designers to bandwidth, is a tremendous expense for our company. At our scale, it wouldâ€™ve been much cheaper to print OnMilwaukee on newsprint.
However, this was back in the Internet stone age â€“ we built OnMilwaukee from the ground up, before WordPress and other templatized options made it easier to publish something professional-looking. In fact, even as we grow revenue and readership, people still often compare us both to one-person and 1,000-person operations, because the perception is that all online media is basically the same.
That would be like comparing a major daily newspaper to a photocopied neighborhood newsletter. Theyâ€™re obviously nothing alike.
However, the problem of fake news takes advantage of this perception of homogeneity. At OnMilwaukee, we hire professional journalists and insist on integrity and quality. We donâ€™t always get it right, and while some assume we have a secret politicized agenda, I can tell you honestly that we do the best we can to present well-written, legitimate lifestyle news. We fact check and follow the rules like we learned in journalism school.
Not everybody does.
Some news organizations find themselves too short-staffed to do the great work they used to (see: the Journal Sentinel). Others assume that "first" trumps "best" (see: Buzzfeed). Some extremely agenda-driven organizations masquerade as news media (see: Breitbart). Worse, some just make stuff up and put it on a site that looks kind of legit (see: Pizzagate).
And hereâ€™s the problem: because of the way automated tools like Google and Facebook work, content doesnâ€™t need to be real, sourced or professionally produced to get read and shared. People fall for it who shouldnâ€™t, like the president-elect of the United States. While thereâ€™s a declining trust in mainstream media, thereâ€™s also an increasing propensity to share stuff that meets the consumerâ€™s need to support a point of view. Thatâ€™s confirmation bias and itâ€™s pretty scary.
Real content curation can only be done by humans; an algorithm can and will get it wrong. If fake news is believed, it almost becomes real news, because it gets attention it shouldnâ€™t. It can be monetizable, and the line between good and bad becomes blurred.
For example, Buzzfeedâ€™s potentially libelous decision to release an unverified intelligence report on Donald Trump â€“ thatâ€™s not fake news, but it might be completely untrue â€“ and Buzzfeed standing to make a lot of money from it. Alternatively, Gawker ran with the Hulk Hogan sex tape; that was real, but it also got them sued out of business.
Consumers should know that page views donâ€™t entirely equal revenue. Itâ€™s true that, generally speaking, the more traffic a news site gets, the more ads it can sell. But just being deluged with new traffic usually means we and others simply run remnant ads from Google Adwords. That tends to amount to peanuts. In fact, last January, when we covered "Making a Murderer" extensively, we actually lost money, because the bandwidth charges of a 10x spike in traffic outweighed the small revenue from all that unexpected and unsold new inventory.
However, fake news isnâ€™t really about making money. Itâ€™s about advancing a cause. And sadly, it works. So whatâ€™s the answer?
On a technical side, Google and Facebook could easily flag content thatâ€™s fake news, since these "articles" never come from a reputable news site. Software solutions, though, arenâ€™t enough. People need to stop believing everything they read. They must look at the Internet with a critical eye before clicking "share," "like" or "tweet this." That will require a culture change, and it might take some time.
So, expect the problem of fake news to get worse before it gets better. For publications like ours that pride ourselves on integrity and professionalism, and there are many others still out there, weâ€™ll keep doing what we do.
In time, we can only hope that readers realize that we have to earn their trust, and that doesnâ€™t happen overnight. Good journalism isnâ€™t dead yet, but it has its back to the wall. Itâ€™s up to all of us to make sure it finds its rightful place to inform and educate a skeptical yet gullible consumer from whom we derive our paychecks. Real news is still out there; you just might have to look a little harder to find it.
Thank you for being a voice on this issue. The other aspect that troubles me is the growing effort to paint ALLl of the media as untrustworthy or biased - so much so, that news sources that have traditionally been reliable (even if they have a political slant) in terms of fact checking and following a code of ethics - are now seen as untrustworthy. I know several people in my personal life who prefer to get "the real story" or "the untold story" from fake news sites because they've come to believe that sources like The Wall Street Journal or the New York Times or the BBC are part of some conspiracy. Yikes!
1 comment about this article.
Post your comment/review now
Disclaimer: Please note that Facebook comments are posted through Facebook and cannot be approved, edited or declined by OnMilwaukee.com. The opinions expressed in Facebook comments do not necessarily reflect those of OnMilwaukee.com or its staff.
Recent Articles & Blogs by Andy Tarnoff
Published May 13, 2017
Such an unlikely pairing. The blue-eyed soul of Hall & Oates, or the Brit pop of Tears For Fears? Who was better Saturday night at the Bradley Center? Depends who you're asking.
Published May 11, 2017
Milwaukee artist Ava Herrider is an animal lover, but it took her a few career changes to settle upon pet portraiture as her full-time job. Last year, she decided to do what moves her: "paint things people love," as she says. In other words, their pets.
Published May 5, 2017
TIKI torches, the outdoor oil lamps synonymous with beach parties and backyard barbecues, aren't made in Maui or Malibu. Nope, the company is based in Menomonee Falls, a city slightly less frequently associated with Polynesian party ware.
Published April 28, 2017
VW built 21 million Beetles up until 2003. Thousands of those iconic Bugs are still on the road, and one Milwaukee company exists solely to build and rebuild their air-cooled engines. Mofoco, started by Randy Henning, is now owned by his son, Roy, and quietly services VW customers around the world.
Published April 25, 2017
While planning next week's trip Up North, I started wondering just how much of Wisconsin I've seen over these last 37 years. So, I downloaded a map and started drawing on it, including the route I have planned for next week.
Published April 14, 2017
Milwaukeeans love our 414, the area code covering the city, the county and parts of Muskego and Brookfield. It's been since 1947, when Bell Telephone established it, along with 715, in Wisconsin. But why did they pick 414?
Published April 12, 2017
Maybe it was all the hard living back then. Maybe it was all the mustaches. But how old was this motley Brewers Crew back in '82?
Published April 3, 2017
The Brewers lost 89 games in 2016, finishing 30.5 behind the Cubs. Then they got rid of Chris Carter, Martin Maldonado and Tyler Thornburg. Is there anywhere to go but up?
Published March 14, 2017
In a market with plenty of big box stores, how does owning a neighborhood Ace Hardware store in this era make sense? Easy, says owners Bob and Kristin Nell. It's about customer service.
Published March 8, 2017
You may be surprised to read this from OnMilwaukee Publisher Andy Tarnoff, but claiming newspapers are dead is at best myopic, and at worst, just wrong. They simply occupy a different place in society now.