Changing Scenes For Modern Journalists
In the analogue days, covering a news event was a much more labour-intensive process. A typical news crew included: (a) Reporter (b). Camera Operator, (c) Sound Technician, (d) .Lighting Technician, (e). Producer, (f). Assistant and (g). Driver/Logistics Coordinator.
Fast forward to over half a century from 1970 the picture is different with a new AI-related paradigm shift which represents a see change in the creation of a transformative mediascape where the role of professional journalist, who is under stress due to having to meet deadlines in a fast-paced newsroom, needs to be multiskilled to tell news stories using multimedia modes namely text, photo, video, audio, and infographics.
In the first technological paradigm shift in the 1970s, the advent of modern technology like electronic news gathering (ENG) cameras which replaced the back-breaking camcorder. It redefined news gathering and streamlined the process significantly. Consequently, today’s journalist, accompanied by a cameraman, is assigned to field reporting. Improvement in media technology enabled the job to only have( one – a single cameraman just for shooting while the interview was done remotely by the television news presenter.
A TV journalist often handles multiple roles thanks to advancement in digital technology. Today’s advanced TV camcorders are lightweight and compact. They are networked and multifunctional, which are capable of direct live streaming of events in high-quality video and audio, eliminating the need for separate sound and lighting technicians. Journalists easily carry these portable professional camcorders with the necessary equipment. Non-linear editing softwares have enabled on-the-go and instantaneous editing which allows journalists or correspondents to quickly edit and livestream news reports aided by fast internet/cellular connectivity. Journalists can broadcast live from the event without the need for extensive setup.
Armed with the latest cutting edge technology the modern journalist has to venture out like a hound to ferret out credible news that matters while at the same time the journalist has to act as a watchdog for maintaining the public interest. Today’s journalist ensures news stories, hurriedly crafted under time pressure, conforms to the canons of objectivity, truth, contextuality, impartiality, transparent, fairness, independent and accessibility having to wade through a labyrinth of huge and mixed data and information, Ai-manipulated news, ‘fabricated news,’ misinformation, rhetorics, ideologies, disinformation while ‘False news and post-truth are two interwoven phenomena that serve specific financial or ideological interests.’ (Poulakidakos, S. et al., ud)
This shift has made news coverage more efficient and cost-effective, though it also places greater demands on individual journalists to multitask and manage various aspects of production.
The Digital Puzzle: Knowing What We Need To Know
“You are entitled to your own views, but you are not entitled to your own facts.”- Schlesinger
What we should know is a determinant issue which can be addressed by fielding four key questions: (a) What knowledge truly serves our well-being and that of the animal kingdom and the planet?, (b) How can we balance technological progress with spiritual and ethical growth?, (c) What does it mean to live a meaningful life in a digital, interconnected world? and (d) How can we cultivate wisdom in an age of information overload?
Given the inherent cognitive limitations of our brain power it poses problems for what we need to know. We are faced with three main problems in the digital world that militate against us. You need to delve into the complexities and challenges that each idea introduces. The three identified key pressures: (a) too much information, (b) need to act fast, and (c) not enough meaning can be examined in relation to these distinct ideas, which might include (1) cognitive overload, (2) decision-making urgency, and (3) the search for meaning.
The digital age presents you with a complex ecology where information is abundant, decisions are urgent, and meaning can be elusive. To navigate this landscape effectively, you must understand how the following three challenges relate to the normative purpose to know.
The Challenges of The Post-Truth Digital Convergence
What is the post-truth era? The Oxford Dictionary describes it as: ‘circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.’ The majority of negative news coverage is directed towards people’s emotions (Philo, 2002). It relates to an arbitrary culture of prioritising emotions, lies, absurdity, rhetorics and subjective perceptions with little or no regard for rationality, common sense, facts or truths.
The term “post-truth” refers to the current time period which is dominated by emotions, beliefs and thoughts prevalent over facts and evidence, thus shaping public opinion. Coined in the early 21st century the term has been used to describe a number of phenomena namely; spread of misinformation, the erosion of trust in traditional sources of information, rhetorical content, fabricated news and the role of social media in shaping public discourses.
(1) Hegemony: Hegemony is the predominance of a collective system of ideas, values, beliefs, and ethical norms that shapes and sustains the cultural, social, and political framework of a society or community within a specific historical context. Hegemony is not an immutable or totalitarian force; instead, it exists within a framework that allows for the emergence of counter hegemonic movements. Media channels sustaining hegemony remain accessible to alternative narratives, which are indispensable for any political or cultural transformation (Holub, 1992, p. 91). In essence, redemptive hegemony leverages the potential of transformative media to reaffirm individual and collective empowerment, allowing people to navigate and shape the evolving epistemic terrain of the digital age. Epistemic security refers to the ability to reliably produce, distribute, acquire, and assess information within a society. Redemptive hegemony means feeling sure about what you know both about yourself and the world. It also means feeling powerful because you accept and follow a trusted way of understanding things.
(2) Transformation is not a singular, dramatic rupture between the old and the new; it must unfold across multiple domains; economic, cultural, sociological, and linguistic—reflecting the interconnected complexity of the digital age. Dominant groups often neutralise revolutionary moments by exploiting the existing structures of media hegemony (Adamson, 1980, p. 225). However, counter hegemonies create fertile conditions for alternatives to thrive by establishing new communicative spaces, practices, values, and epistemic forms of cognitive authority. These elements collectively empower marginalised groups and communities to challenge dominant narratives and reconfigure the resources of influence (Simon, 1991, p. 29).
It is a dynamic, communicative and iterative process that must continuously adapt to remain non-coercive and relevant in the face of shifting social, political, and technological realities (Urbinati, 1998). To justify its legitimacy without resorting to force, elite power structures must expose their claims to public scrutiny, generating diverse and potentially contradictory discourses. These contradictions become valuable tools for critique, especially when they diverge from the lived experiences of those under elite rule (Scott, 1990, p. 106).
(3) Language: This plays a pivotal role in this dynamic. As a structure of values mediated by hegemonic agents, language can reinforce the status quo. In a media environment defined by rapid convergence and the erosion of epistemic clarity, this inherent duality underscores the imperative for journalists and media practitioners to embrace epistemic rigour. Only by fostering value-driven knowledge and creating spaces for alternative discourses can the media and the new media play a transformative role in enabling a more equitable and reflective society.
Furthermore, ‘Redemptive Hegemony’ aligns with today’s transformative media by offering individuals a sense of epistemic empowerment amidst the complexities of the digital era. This is a notion that combines confidence in one’s understanding of the self and the world, the perception of that understanding as reality, and a sense of empowerment that comes from being part of authoritative epistemic (knowledge-based) systems.
In this dynamic landscape, redemptive hegemony reconciles by:
(a). Fostering Epistemic Agency: Transformative media enable individuals to access diverse sources of information, empowering them to engage with and validate authoritative epistemic schemes that resonate with their understanding of reality.
(b) Reinforcing Authenticity: You can challenge dominant narratives, promoting values and ideas that align with their self-knowledge and ethical convictions through participatory platforms and decentralised content creation.
(c) Navigating Contradictions: Redemptive hegemony helps you to reconcile conflicting narratives in media by anchoring their understanding in coherent and meaningful epistemic frameworks, offering clarity amidst digital noise.
(d) Facilitating Community Building: Transformative media supports the formation of communities around shared knowledge and values, strengthening collective confidence and fostering empowerment through mutual validation.
(e) Digital Data Abundance: Accessing reliable information is crucial for collective action in a democratic society. However, new technologies have brought about new threats and vulnerabilities to our systems of information production and exchange, including interference, attention economy, insular communities, and difficulty in evaluating the trustworthiness of information sources.
This creates a number of problems: (a) news saturation, (b) news overexposure, and (c) news fatigue. Multiplatform journalism in the round-the-clock broadcasting has transformed the media ecosystem bringing with it new challenges that threaten the credibility of journalism. One of the most significant issues is the accelerated publication cycles of online journalism, which increase the risk of editorial errors and misinformation. The pressure to publish news stories as quickly as possible can cause mistakes and inaccuracies, resulting in reputational damage for media organisations and a loss of trust among their audience. The avoidance of news threatens the role of the media in supporting citizens to make informed decisions and participate in public debate, thus weakening democracy. The abundance of data leads to mental exhaustion.,
(4) New Media Ecosystem: This is attributable to a plethora of broadcast and broadband multiplatform and multichannel platforms, is overshadowed by a host of changes; media balkanisation, audience fragmentation, community division, niche creation, rampant acquisition or merging of media ownerships, decline of print media, citizen tribalisation, users transmigration, social media-domination and ideological polarisation of the Internet. This paradigm shift challenges professional journalists, citizen journalists, content users and producers who have accelerated the profusion of computer-mediated content. The role and relationship of professional journalists and citizen journalists are characterised by both collaboration and tension, reflecting the dynamic evolution of media ecosystems.
(5) Mental Exhaustion: Adenosine’s Role in Mental Fatigue: It is useful to understand how the mind works and its inherent limitations before we explore the contemporary concomitant opportunities and challenges of the advanced and networked world of convergence. It weakens the processing capability of the human brain which is impressive but limited with the constraints of conscious awareness, just like digitalisation is dependent upon the hardware and software. The difference in processing speed between the brain at 11 million bits per second and the mind’s conscious processing abilities at 40-50 bits per second causes the brain to resort to cognitive shortcuts or heuristics. Despite these reliefs the strained brain is under severe pressure which results in mental fatigue.
(6) Participatory Culture: The emergence of an unprecedented sphere has been facilitated by low or cost-free barriers to entry. The inherent dilemma overshadows the gestalt of participatory audiences and media. Jenkins (2006) argues that participatory culture also involves a sense of social connection among members, who believe that their contributions matter about the opinions of others. (Jenkins et al. 2006). If Jenkins’s statement were true the media would not have been balkanised nor the audience tribalised.
(7) The Contemporary Digital Landscape: This is ‘itself converging, diverging and complicating’ (Livingstone, 2013). Our templated world, screen culture, and multi-platformed media call for new competencies to deal with innovative forms of technology, protocol and information. These changes necessitate: a shift towards networked literacies and CT about the online environment to empower individuals to be active citizens. Tim Lott (9.01.2015) warns; ‘an electronic apocalypse is coming unless we act now.’
(8) The Digital Sphere: This is enabled by digital convergence and riddled with neologisms such as ‘manufactured consent,’ ‘manipulative content,’ and ‘bot-manipulated’ content, has redefined our societal relationships worldwide. This transformation has significantly impacted the traditional values, principles, and standards of legacy media. Legacy media, also known as mass media, traditional media, or old media, has been ironically undermined, with the digital sphere thriving at the expense of public interest. Legacy media, particularly public service broadcasting—now reincarnated as ‘Public Service Media’—prioritises a just, equitable, inclusive, and participatory audience in a vibrant democracy. However, with the rapid and uncritical adoption of social media (SM), it is questionable whether public service media can evolve as an indispensable element for developing civic engagement in a social democracy rather than in a predominantly liberal democracy.
(9) The Illusion of simplified news gathering: The implication of this for journalism is impacting. When the disruptive transformation of the media ecology unfolded, many assumed that the proliferation of multi-platform channels would simplify the task of news gathering. The logic seemed sound: more platforms would mean more sources, perspectives, and tools at the disposal of journalists. However, the reality has proven to be far more complex and paradoxical. Instead of fostering diversity and originality, the digital landscape has given rise to a phenomenon where the same content is repeated or replicated across the internet.
(10) This homogenisation of news: This stems from several factors. Firstly, the intense competition for clicks and engagement has driven media outlets to prioritise speed over depth, resulting in the recycling of headlines and stories. Secondly, algorithm-driven content aggregation amplifies the visibility of trending topics while sidelining nuanced or lesser-known narratives. Finally, the pressure to constantly produce content has led many journalists to rely on wire services or pre-packaged press releases, further diminishing originality.
For journalists, content replication poses a unique challenge. It not only undermines the public’s trust in media but also makes it increasingly difficult to identify unique angles and deliver meaningful, impactful journalism. The promise of a democratised media environment has, ironically, resulted in an echo chamber, where true innovation and investigative rigour are harder to come by than ever before.
The menacing concomitants of social media trigger vital questions; (a) how prejudicial are active, reactive messages and ideological discourses? (b) what are the implications for newsworthy content and reliable information? and (c) how can the transformative media ecology create epistemic environments to empower citizens to understand media content while struggling to meet their own routine challenges in the post-truth world of digitalisation. As we gaze ahead into the future, the news business is growing to be complex and precarious where the public sphere will end up being monopolised by digital giants like Google, Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft, WhatsApp and Apple will influence our life and decisions where elected governments will be powerless to control.
AI can enhance the writing process, but it will never replace the human elements that define journalism relationships, trust, and the pursuit of exclusive stories. The year 2024 has seen a decline in the use of news websites which is likely to continue and the rise of alternative media channels signal a shift in audience behaviour that publishers must adapt to.
Surprisingly along with the evolution and social penetration of digital trends chances are that the print media may find rebound as a niche of a luxury experience for those seeking respite from the digital deluge. In short, the news industry will continue to innovate, but its core mission—to inform and connect may remain unchanged. Jonathan Hunt, Vice President of Media at HubSpot and Head of The Hustle, warned: “websites aren’t where audiences or advertisers are increasingly investing their time or budgets.”
(11) Searching for Attention Creates Digital Zombies (DZs): Rising content and super abundant social media and broadcast channels have enslaved children to narcissism and hedonism. Contemporary society is heavily mediated by digital gadgets like mobile phones. Children with a mobile phone are alone in a crowd. They live in a silo in public as well as in the privacy of their bedrooms, where they are moronically glued to their screens and re-emerge as DZs like the undead.
A ‘Digital Zombie’ is a person using digital technology and/or social media to the point that it takes control of their life for the worse, to the point that they become fixated only on that faux reality. In the process, DZs have carved out their own niche. Andrew Campbell expressed concerns over whether or not the individual can truly live a full and healthy life while they are preoccupied with the digital world. These DZs present a cold and meaningless physical appearance in the presence of their parents.
The DZs lose moments to love, connect, and care for others when its attention is extracted for profit. For the DZs, the thesis of Warm Bodies might not sound so far-fetched. DZs are walking disasters, courting unnecessary risks to their lives, and have now become a source of light-hearted entertainment for television viewers. Thousands of CCTV cameras for traffic enforcement and surveillance installed in and around shopping centres, malls, and residential streets have built up a hilarious stock of footage of the misadventures, stumbles, and follies of these DZs who, fixated by their gadgets and connected to the virtual or web world, test their invincibility by mindlessly walking in front of moving vehicles. Digital zombies collide against pillars, lamp posts, shop windows, knock over pedestrians, fall into potholes, and startle happily sleeping dogs on the pavements.
(12) Speed over Accuracy: A handbook by the Reuters Institute for the study of Journalism found that 56 percent of people in the US and 49 percent of people in the UK believe that journalists prioritise speed over accuracy to compete with social media platforms. Huang et al. ‘s (2016) study found that social media can increase the speed at which information is disseminated while also speeding up the spread of misinformation and the amplification of biased perspectives. The research also indicated that more than half of the respondents in both countries were concerned about the reliability of news on social media platforms. These findings highlight the need for media organisations to prioritise accuracy and reliability over speed.
(13) Trust Deficit: The deluge of scandals, deception, and misinformation indicates that trust and truth are declining. Edelman’s Trust Barometer (2023) revealed that (a) two-thirds of the countries surveyed are now considered “distrusters,” with less than half of the population trusting mainstream institutions such as business, government, media, and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to act ethically; (b) over two-thirds of the general population lack confidence in their leaders’ ability to address the challenges facing their countries; and (c) the media are distrusted in more than 80 percent of the countries surveyed.
This lack of trust in institutions and leaders is concerning, as it can erode societal cohesion, create chaos, and corrupt, resulting in a loss of faith in the democratic process. It also makes it more difficult for organisations and governments to effectively implement policies and solve problems. It is important for leaders and institutions to take steps to regain the public’s trust by being transparent, accountable, and working to address the concerns and issues that drive mistrust.
(14) Disregard for Political Accountability: Accountability erosion is a function of diminishing trust. The need for a functional system of media regulation is becoming more pressing as the integrity of the international media landscape faces challenges from far-reaching transformations. In democratic societies, various instruments of media accountability, including press and media councils or journalism ethics boards, play a crucial role in ensuring responsible media performance. However, as the established system of media accountability encounters new challenges, concerns arise about the effectiveness of these instruments as guardians of press freedom and media plurality.
(15) Media Accountability: In their book “Power Without Responsibility: Press, Broadcasting and the Internet in Britain,” James Curran and Jean Seaton (2019) have revisited issues relevant to the digital era worldwide. The pivotal argument is the immense power of digital media, which lacks accountability and responsibility as a source of newsworthy content. The relegation of accountability is attributed to the decentralisation of the media, the rise of social media and online news platforms, low entry costs allowing anyone to become a content creator, and easy access to the internet.
One of the main concerns regarding media accountability instruments is their ability to effectively ensure media responsibility without infringing on press freedom and media plurality. While press councils are meant to hold media outlets accountable for inaccurate or unethical reporting, they may also limit freedom of the press if they are overly punitive or restrictive in their judgments. Research has shown that the effectiveness of media accountability instruments varies depending on the media culture of the country in question. In some countries, press and media councils have been effective in promoting responsible journalism and media freedom. For example, the Press Complaints Commission in the UK has been successful in resolving complaints without resorting to legal action.
However, media accountability instruments are insufficient in addressing new challenges facing the media landscape, such as the spread of disinformation and the rise of social media. These challenges require new approaches to media regulation that involve a combination of self-regulation, government intervention, public education, and, above all, a foundation in epistemic knowledge. The effectiveness of media accountability instruments depends on the media culture of the country in question, and new challenges require innovative approaches to media regulation.
(16) Devitalisation of the Internet: This term refers to the process of depriving something of vitality or essential qualities, making it lifeless or weakened. A concerning aspect of the internet is its role in the devitalisation or disengagement of users with extreme content. The internet has facilitated easier access to extreme content, including hate speech, extremist ideologies, and violent propaganda. This access has contributed to a decline in CT skills and an increase in exposure to harmful ideas. Research indicates that exposure to extreme content can lead to desensitisation and a reduction in empathy, making individuals more susceptible to extremist ideologies.
(17). Tribalisation of the Audience: This phenomenon occurs when filter bubbles form due to the attention economy, leading individuals to be exposed primarily to their pre-existing beliefs while opposing views are blocked. People tend to focus on opinions from familiar sources within their communities, facilitated by social media platforms. This results in “bounded rationality,” where limited access to diverse information impairs effective reasoning and decision-making.
(18) Political Manipulation of Social Media: Social media platforms have become powerful tools for political manipulation, posing serious concerns for democracy. The spread of false, misleading, and biased information, coupled with the lack of transparency and accountability from social media companies, and their failure to effectively monitor their platforms, contribute to this issue. It is crucial for society to recognise these challenges and take measures to address them, such as implementing increased regulation of social media companies, supporting fact-checking initiatives, and promoting media literacy campaigns. The capability of these platforms to reach vast audiences quickly and at low cost has made them attractive to politicians and political organisations seeking to sway public opinion. However, this also facilitates the spread of misinformation, which can have detrimental effects on democracy. Research has shown that social media algorithms can exacerbate the spread of false information and polarise public opinion by prioritising engagement over accuracy, thus giving misleading information precedence over factual content.
Social media companies have faced criticism for their opacity and lack of accountability. There have been numerous instances of foreign governments using social media to interfere in the political processes of other countries. Furthermore, the failure of social media companies to effectively regulate their platforms has led to widespread dissemination of hate speech, fake news, and other harmful content, prompting calls for stricter regulation to curb their influence on public opinion.
(19) Conspiracy Theory: The democratisation of social media which has given rise to the resurgence of conspiracy theories in the digital era has profoundly disrupted journalism, demanding its critical redefinition. Technological advancements, particularly algorithmic amplification on digital platforms, have magnified the spread of conspiracy theories, eroding public trust and creating epistemic confusion (Wardle & Derakhshan, 2017). Audiences often struggle to distinguish credible information from fabrications as misinformation’s speed and scale outpace cognitive tools like critical thinking and skepticism (Vosoughi, Roy, & Aral, 2018).
Conspiracy theory, once marginal phenomena, now has gained traction and widespread visibility through algorithmically driven content, complicating the mediasphere. It intensifies challenges for journalists who navigate between reporting truth and countering disinformation.
When content creators experience cognitive dissonance, they may seek simple explanations to resolve their discomfort. Conspiracy theories, which provide a coherent (though often false) narrative, can become attractive solutions, making individuals more vulnerable to manipulation. Effectively, the journalistic response to conspiracy theories must go beyond factual reporting to promote epistemic resilience and public enlightenment. Through rigorous philosophical training and media literacy initiatives, journalism can restore its role as a pillar of truth. By reinforcing the power of dialectic reasoning and philosophical inquiry, journalists can help individuals navigate the complexities of modern information landscapes, empowering them to lead examined lives grounded in reason, truth, and understanding.
(20). Alternative News Sources: The rise of alternative news sources, including online-only news outlets and social media, has also contributed to the decline of traditional news organisations. The Pew Research Center found that a significant percentage of U.S. adults now rely on alternative news sources, such as social media, as their primary news source (Perrin, A., 2019).
(21). Four Personality Traits That Make an Internet Troll: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, Psychopathy, and Schadenfreude. A new study conducted by researchers from Brigham Young University has revealed the personality traits that motivate a person to become an online troll. It found that those who post inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive comments online possess the dark triad personality traits and gloat at other people’s misfortunes.
(22) Asymmetric Information: This occurs when one party in a transaction has more or superior information compared to the other. In the context of social media, it can happen when users share content that misrepresents their personal or professional experiences, expertise, or qualifications. Asymmetric information is pervasive across various fields and can undermine the critical autonomy of citizens. Deploying critical media literacy (CML) can help overcome information barriers (Jindrich Vanek and Josef Botlik, 2013).
These social, psychological, technological, political, and economic factors demonstrate their impact on media and journalism, challenging the aims, principles, standards, and particularly the press freedom underpinnings of journalism in the post-truth era of digital convergence.
(23). Impact of Social Media on Traditional News Organisations: The impact of the internet on traditional news organisations is often described in terms of the contrast between the open, free, inclusive, participatory, collaborative, deliberative, and pluralistic nature of the internet and the decline of traditional news media organisations due to mergers, acquisitions, and shutdowns. This decline is attributed to several factors, including the shift of audience attention from traditional to digital media, the rise of alternative news sources, and changes in the business models of traditional news organisations.
(24). Shift in Audience Behaviour: The decline of traditional news organisations is significantly impacted by the shift of audience attention from traditional media to digital media. The Reuters Institute reported a decline in the percentage of people who regularly use traditional news sources, like television and newspapers, and an increase in those who use digital news sources, such as online news websites and social media (Newman, N., et al., 2017).
(25). Attention Deficit: Content writers may note their traditional writing style the golden rule of grabbing attention – the first 10 seconds of reading are critical.’ This is likely to happen if your press releases, websites, blogs and social media messages are not ingeniously, inventively and creatively written to attract attention.
Users often leave Web pages in 10–20 seconds, but if pages are informatively, educatively and with a clear value proposition can hold people’s attention for much longer. To gain several minutes of user attention, you must clearly communicate your value proposition within 10 seconds. (Jakob Nielsen Sept 11, 2011)
(26). Epistemic Insecurity. This was rife during the pandemic. The UK’s bleak economic outlook post-Brexit, with the lowest growth in the G20, exemplifies the consequences of a lack of diversity in media opinion. The highly partisan British media, especially evident in the run-up to the EU referendum, failed to provide impartial and pluralist coverage, contributing to economic challenges such as runaway inflation, low growth, and dwindling investment prospects. The media’s role in the Brexit debate, criticised for its biased and EU-prejudiced coverage, highlights the failure to fulfill the responsibility of providing impartial and balanced reporting (Taylor, Ros.16.05.2017)
The British media’s coverage of the Brexit debate was characterised by a failure to provide clear explanations and a tendency towards poorly articulated, biased, and EU-prejudiced reporting, including ‘scaremongering’ articles. Despite playing a significant role in the Brexit debate, the media did not fulfill its responsibility to offer impartial and balanced coverage. Broadcast media, newspapers, and social media broadly supported the Leave campaign through their coverage and/or editorial policies.
In the United Kingdom, the broadcast media’s approach was constrained by the rules of Ofcom, Britain’s regulator and competition authority for the UK communications industries. It also regulates the TV and radio sectors, fixed line telecoms, mobiles, postal services, plus the airwaves over which wireless devices operate. British rules on impartiality and balance, leading to coverage that, in the author’s view, was misleading and lacked substance. Newspapers, caught up in the excitement of the campaign, failed to hold both sides accountable. An analysis by the University of Loughborough revealed that the Leave viewpoint was emphasised to 82 percent of readers, while only 18 percent were exposed to the Remain viewpoint.
Regarding social media, it was noted that despite the Brexit camp generating most of the debate’s intensity, the majority of social media users, particularly those in the 18-40 age group, voted to Remain. The skepticism surrounding social media’s ‘echo chamber’ effect, where users are exposed only to views they agree with, contributes to polarisation rather than promoting a diversity of viewpoints. This situation underscores the media’s failure to provide straightforward facts and to challenge the falsehoods presented by both sides. The outcome of the poll should serve as a wake-up call for the industry
The contemporary period is associated with the age of falsehoods that are crowding out newsworthy reports which have undergone the editorial process, which involves a chain of media professionals, trained or indentured reporters, fact-checkers, and editors (Goldman, Alvin I., 2011). In January 2018, CEO Mark Zuckerberg shifted the responsibility of detecting false ‘news’ to the public when he wrote, “We could try to make that decision ourselves, but that’s not something we’re comfortable with” (Linda Emma, March 5). This alluded to the controversial issue of news censorship. Several media organisations have shifted the burden of skepticism onto their audience, which is seen as relieving journalism from its responsibility to fact-check due to the overwhelming amount of information that needs to be processed (Riordan, Kellie, 2014).
The term ‘Fake News’ is a broader term that encompasses misinformation, malinformation and disinformation (MMD). It strikes across wider topics including health, environment, and economics on various platforms. But experts have urged to avoid it due to its strong association with politics, which narrows its scope. They have put forward the term false information instead. False information refers to news, stories, or hoaxes created to mislead or deceive audiences, often for influencing opinions, advancing agendas, or generating profit. Martina Chapman, a media literacy expert, identifies mistrust, misinformation, and manipulation as the core elements of false information.
The rise of false information has primarily been accelerated by social media with ‘Facebook being a more fertile breeding ground for fake news than Twitter.’ It provides unregulated spaces for content sharing without strict editorial oversight. Misinformation is false information that is spread by people who think it’s true. This is different from ‘fake news’ and disinformation.
While traditional media adhere to rigorous codes, the economics of social media favour sensationalism, speed, and shareability, making it harder for users to discern credible sources. Various forms of fake news include:
- Clickbait: Sensational headlines designed to attract clicks, often sacrificing accuracy.
- Propaganda: Biased stories created to mislead or promote agendas.
- Satire/Parody: Fake stories meant for entertainment, often mistaken for factual news.
- Sloppy Journalism: Inaccurate reporting due to insufficient fact-checking.
- Misleading Headings: Distorted articles with sensational headlines that misrepresent the content.
- Biased News: Stories catering to audiences’ existing beliefs or biases.
- Imposter Content: False information mimicking legitimate sources to appear credible.
- Manipulated Content: Altered photos, videos, or data used to deceive or misinform.
Market Forces: Free market ideas have been the driving force shaping media policy in the UK since the 1980s and followed by India thereafter. Although free market competition is essential for empowering consumers, fostering freedom, and achieving efficiency, media history informs us that public interest as a public good would not exist if it wasn’t for the government’s interventionist policy. Normative economics holds the view that left to citizens they would opt for purely and exclusively entertainment and excitement channels which unbeknown to them only leads to entanglement with their own ignorant or skewed minds. Many participants actively looked for more entertaining or uplifting news in social media or aggregators instead. (Reuters, 2012)
The Reuters report points to a growing disconnect between what traditional news brands offer and what young consumers are looking for: “Traditional news brands feel their job is to tell people what they should know. To an extent youngsters also want what is useful to know, what is interesting to know and what is fun to know.” The traditional normative practice has been challenged by the rise of socially constructive learning, driven by online teaching methods and the widespread use of collaborative, cooperative, and interactive platforms.
Mainstream media need to make news more accessible, relevant and entertaining to attract the next generation of consumers. Free market advocates, the market not only makes for efficient media but also produces media that people want, a wide range of choice, and media independence from government. However, it acknowledges criticisms of this approach, particularly with regards to public service broadcasting, which is often viewed by free market advocates as unrepresentative and prone to waste and profligacy. The pace of deregulation has not been fast enough for committed neo-liberals, some of whom argue that the BBC should be broken up into independent, separately financed stations funded partly by advertising.
In this context, it suggests that regulation can play a role in ensuring that the market functions in the public interest. It notes that there have been attempts to regulate media policy at the European level through directives such as the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, which aims to remove barriers to cross-border competition between television organisations in Europe. It addresses some of the concerns about media concentration and unrepresentative broadcasting that have been raised by critics of the free-market approach.
However, television was still a collective activity, and now we seem to be paradoxically connecting ourselves to death on our solitary screens. The coordinates of the empty space we used to climb into to find ourselves are being lost, and an entire generation does not even know of its existence. Therefore, taking the first steps towards controlling the information/entertainment overload within their family, starting with banning all screens in the house during weekends and afternoons. (Postman, N. (1985).
(27) Explanatory Journalism: The rapid and continuous flow of online and 24-hour broadcast news has necessitated further clarification and elucidation due to the prevalence of incomplete, misleading, and inaccurate information. The absence of an editorial process and regulation contributes to this issue. Explanatory journalism (EJ) is a response strategy that aims to explain complex issues and events through detailed reporting and analysis, helping readers and viewers develop a deeper understanding of the topics covered and promoting a more critical approach to media consumption (Carlson, 2020).
(28) Transparency, The Third Principle, is essential for fostering trust. Being transparent about sources, interests, intent, methods, and affiliations is crucial wherever reasonable. This includes being open about values and codes of practice against which an organisation may be held accountable.
The author expresses his gratitude for the privilege to climb the shoulders of the great giants whose names are listed in the appendix to be able to see farther. Besides being inspired by a number of prominent thinkers, philosophers, monks and deep thinkers who come from different fields and subfields including mass media, journalism, education, philosophy, psychology and neuroscience.