In response to
the recent election fiasco progressives are increasing their efforts to control
the internet. They are targeting
“fake news.” Obviously no one is
in favor of “fake news.” This
should be a clear winning strategy.
Progressives can portray themselves as the defenders of democracy and
free speech. At the same time they
will be able to eliminate some troublesome competitors who might question their
own reliability.
The
forces arrayed against the powers of falsehood are formidable. They include heads of state, internet
providers, major news organizations, and a myriad of private groups. President Obama proclaimed, “There has
to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that
passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard because
they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the
world.” This is a curious
statement since truthiness is defined as ”the
quality of seeming to be true according to one's intuition, opinion, or perception
without regard to logic, factual evidence, or the like.” Angela
Merkel told the German Bundestag, “Opinions aren't formed the way they
were 25 years ago. We must
confront this phenomenon and if necessary, regulate it."
Internet
providers have joined the effort.
Facebook says it will no longer place Facebook-powered ads on
“fake news” websites. Google said
it would stop letting fake news sites use its ad placement network. Google has created an entity composed
of mainstream news outlets. It is called
the First Draft Coalition and presents itself as a kind of Ministry of Truth. It will decide which stories are true
and which are “fake.” The New York
Times is in the vanguard of this movement. It has criticized Facebook and Google for making it possible
for fake news to be shared by millions.
The Times pointed to the negative outcome of fake news pointing to the
ethnic violence in Myanmar that a
“fake news” report contributed to.
The criticism of “fake news” on the internet makes no mention of
“fake news” in the main stream media.
The extensive bias in the media is one of the reasons for the attack on
the internet. It would require
several volumes to list all the examples of “fake news” disseminated by the
main stream media. A recent
example is the New York Times’ criticism of Senator Ben Sasse. The Times reported that Sasse, “tweeted
about people who have been paid to riot against Mr. Trump — an idea propagated
by fake news stories.” In the
Washington Post Paul
Horner remarked Trump’s, “supporters were under the belief that people
were getting paid to protest at their rallies, and that’s just insane.” Perhaps the Washington Post and New
York Times were unaware that two top Democratic
strategists were on video discussing voter fraud and planting paid agitators at
campaign events for Donald Trump.
There are
countless examples of “fake news” reports. Some of them were relatively harmless like the stories of Janet Cooke and Jayson Blair. Other example were more
significant. Dan Rather’s
2004 report on George Bush’s military service was designed to effect a
presidential election. Michael
Isikoff’s 2005 article in Newsweek about the US military putting a Koran in
the toilet possibly led to 17 deaths during riots in Afghanistan. The Times
incorrectly reported, “ tracing the firing location of a Syrian sarin-laden
rocket in 2013 back to a Syrian military base.” In 2003 CNN head Eason
Jordan admitted in a New York Times op-ed piece titled “The News We Kept
to Ourselves” that he deliberately whitewashed Saddam Hussein’s
atrocities.
Some of these “fake news” stories have had a significant impact on
world history. In 1933 Purlitzer
Prize winning New York Times correspondent Walter Durante’s downplaying of the
Ukrainian famine facilitated President Roosevelt’s recognition of the Soviet
Union. More famous is William
Randolph Hearst’s comment to artist Frederic Remington who he had sent to Cuba,
“You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war,” shortly before the Spanish
American War.
Who has monitored the dissemination of information in the past? In a free society it should be
regulated by the market. When
people feel they are not being served they seek alternate sources. A large number of consumers believe
that the major media are not serving them adequately. They are seeking information elsewhere. Progressives would like to prevent
this. If they want to be
successful they should do this patiently without fanfare. Instead they are using people like
ex-Stasi agent Anetta
Kahane.
No comments:
Post a Comment