Epistemic Responsibility of Journalists
Epistemic responsibility is the cornerstone of authentic journalism. It demands that journalists not only seek the truth but also present it in a manner that fosters understanding. This involves rigorous fact-checking, contextualising information, and resisting the temptation to oversimplify complex issues. For instance, reporting on climate change requires an understanding of scientific data, its implications, and the diverse stakeholders involved. By presenting the issue holistically, journalists can educate their audiences and inspire informed action.
Moreover, journalists must become epistemic creators—individuals who generate knowledge that expands human understanding. This requires transcending their own cognitive limitations and embracing intellectual virtues. For instance, instead of merely reporting on communal tensions, a journalist could investigate the historical, economic, and cultural factors contributing to the conflict. Such reporting not only informs but also empowers audiences to engage in constructive dialogue and problem-solving.
Transcendence is the key to knowing what you want to be or to have. Unfortunately, the modern mind and knowledge have fallen short in leading us to the station of life.
This growing issue highlights the need for media literacy and critical evaluation of online content.
We are tackling with ill-intention inside articles which are taken as true and forward them onwards to friends and families without even reading it. Fake information is not genuine but is presented as real, with the intention of deceiving and misleading the audience. This definition contributes to the field of ‘systems-oriented social epistemology’ (Goldman, Alvin I., 2011). The old term of propaganda that has in the modern time evolved as a composite problem, which refers to dis/mis/mal-information. It is predominantly an online phenomenon of false or misleading statements, sometimes connected to actual events, created to deceive and influence the public through an opportunistic format resembling news (such as headlines, images, content) to increase clicks, shares, advertising revenue, or further an ideology (João P. Baptista and Anabela Gradim, 2022). It is intended to change someone’s opinions, beliefs and decisions.
Foucault’s (1970) implicit ‘rules of formation’ govern what constitutes legitimate forms of knowledge for a particular cultural period. Cognitive bias and epistemic bias are interrelated. Cognitive bias refers to the tendency to systematically deviate from rationality or objectivity in various ways, including biases in perception, memory, judgment, decision-making, and reasoning. Epistemic bias is a type of bias that specifically affects scientific inquiry and knowledge acquisition, diverting from the ideals of objectivity and impartiality in the process of scientific inquiry.
Sweeping new laws to deal with falsehoods have implications for free speech and the character of India as an Indo-Pacific power (Sasha Fegan). Given the capricious politicians and decision-makers in the modern age, one has to be circumspect. News and information have being weaponised against freedom of expression and press freedom since the advent of the Internet emerged four decades ago. Content can mislead and indoctrinate, influencing people’s decision and paving their way for spreading a hegemonic culture. “Now we are drowning in outrage stories, very high-quality outrage stories, often supported by horrifying video clips. Social media are turning out to be a gigantic centrifugal force” (Jonathan Haidt, 2017).
Fake news has been recognised as some of the most challenging dilemmas that face us are the scourge of fake ‘news.’. The Collins dictionary’s definition as: ‘false, often sensational, information disseminated under the guise of news reporting,’ could not be more meaningful. The phrase “false news” which the EBU and UNESCO refer to as an oxymoron is a mess of conflicting meanings because ‘false news’ is a contradiction.
Instead the term ‘counterfeit’ is one word that embodies all the traits of falsehoods, as well as convenience to use a single word. The proliferation of counterfeit news on social media and the blogosphere has made it more difficult for individuals to discern what is true or real and has led to the erosion of trust in traditional sources of information and the rise of alternative sources of information that may not be based on fact.
In 2017, Wardle rejected the phrase false ‘news’ on the ground that it is ‘woefully inadequate’ which she substituted with the term ‘information disorder’ and ‘information pollution.” (Higdon, Nolan, 15.08.2020).
Counterfeit news spreads false beliefs (Silverman and Singer-Vine, 2016a), and excessive skepticism may prevent people from accepting true information from credible sources (Fallis, 2004). Despite being an effective tool the Internet with all its affordances enhances people’s quality of life.
However a huge category of people has been overwhelmed by their negatively skewed approach to digital convergence whose limited mindset is incapable of perceiving a knife as more than a murder weapon. A new study by Brigham Young University has pointed out four personality traits that trigger Internet trolls; those who post inflammatory, irrelevant or offensive comments online possess the dark personality traits, including narcissism, hedonism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism combined with schadenfreude – getting enjoyment out of other people’s misfortunes.
Barriers to Reengaging Viewers With Journalism
- Addiction to Drama: Many viewers are conditioned to excitement, tension, and conflict. Calm and nuanced discussions may initially seem dull or “slow.” The emotional high of watching fiery debates is difficult to replace with sober discourse.
- Commercial Pressure: Media houses prioritise ratings and ad revenue, and sensationalism delivers both. Thoughtful journalism, which may not generate immediate profits is often sidelined. Advertisers invest in shows with high viewership, creating a feedback loop that rewards sensational content.
- Short Attention Spans: In the age of TikTok and Instagram, viewers are accustomed to quick, bite-sized content. Long, issue-driven discussions require sustained focus, which can be a tough sell.
- Polarisation: Thoughtful journalism often seeks balance and nuance, which can alienate audiences who are used to partisan reporting. Viewers may dismiss balanced reporting as “boring” or “biased against their side.”
- Trust Deficit: Many viewers have lost trust in mainstream media, assuming it serves political or corporate interests. Even quality journalism may struggle to regain credibility in such an environment.
- Journalist Bias: Compounded to the above is the personal bias of the journalist which cannot be overlooked. It further eclipses the journalist’s role as a neutral observer leading to an erosion of trust between the journalist and the viewers. Additionally, personal fears, beliefs, and emotions—whether those of journalists or their audiences—can subtly, yet significantly, influence the framing of stories. Accessible, free, open and independent media are vital to vibrant democracy.Information, the power of an Information Society needs to be credible, truthful and factual. Digital transformation of the media ecosystem has augmented and accelerated information. Lippmann and others began to look for ways for the individual journalist “to remain clear and free of his irrational, unexamined, unacknowledged prejudgments in observing, understanding and presenting the news.” This was the idea that if reporters simply dug out the facts and ordered them together, truth would reveal itself rather naturally. While more research is needed to refine these interventions, the potential for reducing cognitive biases in journalism is promising.