Beyond Macedonia: The Role of Fake News in Today’s World

In light of the 2016 U.S. elections, the term fake news has become a widely used buzzword. After the surprising election of Donald Trump as president, many have been quick to blame social media and fake news as the main driver in electing the 45th president. For many, fake news is a new development, a product of the internet and social media services. False news or fake news is not a new phenomenon, but the way that information is consumed and proliferated has changed immensely in the age of social media. In fact, many academic studies on the effects of fake news on society have been published over the last ten years yielding varying results. Some studies dismiss fake news as nothing more than an annoyance; others contend that fake news is a serious threat to our Democracy. In light of recent events, the question remains: is fake news damaging to society and if so, how do we mitigate the negative consequences of it?

![inhabita.jpg]()

Before the rise of the internet, when publications were largely print, there was always a filter before news was published: the editor. Editorial policies of specific publications would determine what was printed. These policies ensured that writers would use credible sources, ultimately being fact checked before being published. Then came radio and broadcast television, which largely practiced the same set of policies or ethics as newspapers did. In the digital age, anyone can become a publisher. In fact, social media services like Facebook take that even a step further. On Facebook, every participant is in essence consuming and creating media at the same time. A Facebook user can like or share a news article in the blink of an eye. “Content can be relayed among users with no significant third party filtering, fact-checking, or editorial judgment” (Allcott and Gentzkow 2). In a way, media has been turned on its head. Before the internet, consuming news was fairly synchronous; one would have to tune into a radio station or television channel, pick up a newspaper or magazine in order to read the news. In the current digital age, communications have become largely asynchronous. Social networks like Facebook and Twitter allow people not only to consume media, but to respond to it and even re-publish it. People no longer have to wait for a specific time to tune in, they just have to log on.

![Great-Moon-Hoax-1835-New-York-Sun-lithograph-298px.jpg]()

Fake news, or intentionally false new stories, is not a new phenomenon. One historical example is the Great Moon Hoax of 1835, in which the New York Sun published a series of articles about the discovery of life on the moon (Allcott and Gentzkow 2). The hoax quickly increased the Sun’s circulation and increased its credibility. Surprisingly, the public who read these stories were not angered when the ruse was exposed; they were happy to have read such entertaining stories. But fake news can pose a threat to national security, as noted in a paper from Brad Reed and Sara Gibson, “Economic terrorists and malicious hackers can cause, at least momentarily, serious economic damage as when a bogus AP Tweet from a hacked account concerning an explosion at the White House wiped $136 billion in stock value” (6).

When consuming news, being aware of the source of the information is paramount. But in the age of social media, people do little or no fact checking. More troubling is that most people interact with stories that adhere to their beliefs, which renders the validity of a source irrelevant. A study done in 1940 by Sociologist Paul Lazarsfeld found that people’s political beliefs aren’t easily changed by advertising. The study used surveys to compare the subject’s political opinion before showing ads that were intended to sway them. In the end, they concluded that, “opinions were largely stable and invariant to media messages” (Uscinski 56). From this we can conclude that fake news often doesn’t serve to change people’s minds about something, but rather reinforces pre existing views and beliefs. That does not make fake news completely innocuous however. Studies show that people that consume fake news stories often end up believing them (Allcott and Gentzkow 2). A survey from BuzzFeed found that, “three in four American adults who see fake-news headlines believe them” (Waddell 1). Another issue is that many people aren’t sure who to trust when it comes to news sources. Not only is the media landscape saturated with sources, Donald Trump has himself been accusing traditionally reliable media sources of propagating fake news. This is especially troubling given the ease of access to information the public enjoys today. Just one headline with false information can influence the public, and once fake news is disseminated, it quickly becomes hard for the public to discern if the news itself is trustworthy. Shortly after a false headline or news story is shared, “the meme spreading pattern becomes indistinguishable from an organic one” (Ratkiewicz et al. 302). The danger of false news quickly becomes apparent, as people with racist, sexist and homophobic views could feel more empowered about their beliefs leading to harassment or even violence.

![moonhoax3.jpg]()

Fake news is produced by a myriad of sources, all with different intentions. Some actually want to influence the outcome of a political event; others just want profit. Many have started websites that mimic the looks of a reputable source and publish stories with misleading facts, rumors, conspiracy theories and the like in an effort to drive traffic and increase ad revenue. In a Wired article titled, “Inside The Macedonian Fake-News Complex,” author Samanth Subramanian visits a small town called Veles in Macedonia where an 18 year old man was instrumental in creating much of the false media that proliferated up to and after the 2016 election. The man who goes by Boris controlled at least 100 pro-Trump websites which featured articles that fed off of popular right wing political sentiments. In no time, Boris was receiving substantial revenue from ads, his articles being shared and talked about in mainly right-wing circles on the internet. Boris didn’t care who won the election; he was merely running the sites as a way to make money in his impoverished town. The Macedonian news farm is a stark contrast to other false media sources, those who do want to sway an election to their liking. The term known as “astroturfing” refers to spreading false media in order to influence a political event. A paper published in 2011 looked at astroturfing using Twitter as an example of how news spreads. The paper found that much of the false information used came from users with multiple accounts, who would then spread the media through their fake accounts. They also were able to locate many bot networks, which would modify the source of the tweet before sending it out, tweaking the original message just enough to not be noticed by a person. The effects of this lead to the illusion that real people were actually engaging in said media, although it was in fact being spread by bots mimicking human interaction (Ratkiewicz et al. 4). This sort of deception is common on social media sites today. Many social media services are aware of this abuse and are constantly changing their code to try and eliminate these sort of campaigns.

![moonhoaz5.jpg]()

While Facebook and other social media websites do have algorithms that filter data, they are largely inept at recognizing false media stories. Of course, that’s not the job that the algorithms were designed to perform. They were designed to curate news to users based on their preferences and data, not act as a sort of editor and filter content based on the validity of claims. At the moment, Facebook largely relies on its users to report news, posts and comments that they deem harmful or false. In light of the 2016 election, Facebook and other social media sites have vowed to put their best efforts towards stopping the spread of fake news. There are many approaches to identifying fake news, as data scientist Carlos Castillo explains. The first step is to consider the source of the media and determine if it comes from a trustworthy outlet. Newspapers, well known journalists and academic papers are just a few examples of what one could deem trustworthy. Secondly, one could look to social media and determine how the story was shared and how people interacted with it. By looking at the words used in the description of the article, comments section and the kinds of users who post it, algorithms could determine the validity of the story. A third method of examining the story includes, “analyzing its internal logic, combing it for claims, and checking those claims against known facts” (Waddell 1). By training algorithms to spot these sorts of patterns, social media companies will be able to more effectively weed out deceptive information and help curb its spread on their networks. While these algorithms won’t completely stop the spread of disinformation, it will help journalists and the public to identify dubious sources.

It will take some time to examine the effects that fake news had in the outcome of the 2016 elections, but as we can see it can have a detrimental impact on society. The damaging effects of fake news will continue to be a problem in the future, but there are ways to limit the power of false information. New tools are being developed to help identify fake news, which will help journalists and the public to better verify their sources. But we will have to do better than algorithms. As we march into the future and adapt new technologies to our lives, we need to be both cautious and aware of how we use them.

Works Cited

• Alcott, Hunt, and Matthew Gentzkow. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election."Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election - Stanford University. Stanford University, New York University, 12 Mar. 2017. Web. 20 Apr. 2017.
• Ratkiewicz, Jacob, Conover, Michael, Meiss, Mark, Goncalves, Bruno, Flammini, Alessandro, and Menczer, Filippo. "Detecting and Tracking Political Abuse in Social Media" International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (2011): n. pag. Web. 14 Apr. 2017
• Reid, Brad and Sarah Gibson. "Fake News and the First Amendment: A Developing Standard." Insights to a Changing World Journal, vol. 2014, no. 3, Sept. 2014, pp. 3-15.
• Subramanian, Samanth. "The Macedonian Teens Who Mastered Fake News." Wired. Conde Nast, 31 Mar. 2017. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.
• Uscinski, Joseph E. "Fake News Freakout." ["Reason"]. Reason, vol. 48, no. 10, Mar. 2017, pp. 54-59.
• Waddell, Kaveh. "Algorithms Can Help Stomp Out Fake News." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 07 Dec. 2016. Web. 14 Apr. 2017.