They say if you watch the news you’re misinformed and if you don’t watch the news you are uninformed. This chain of endless paradoxical narratives is the birth of the phenomenon we like to call “Fake News”. As much as we post about fake news on social media or hear the phrase mentioned by the talking heads on TV, while we watch as we brew our morning coffee. Nobody has a firm grasp on what it truly is. The term fake news has been abused so often that the original function it serves is no longer in use. For the most part we know that it is fabricated news, however the majority of the people that accuse an oppositional view of having fake news, is actually producing fake news themselves.
The erroneous stories that are written in the journals of today are often used strategically to sway elections, cause psychological confusion, and spread conspiracy theories. The mass influx of information on the internet causes writing to be a rat race for journalist to put out information before their competition regardless if it’s factual or not.
Nevertheless, the news is more of an emotional outlet than it is factual. This is called expressivism. Expressivism is a moral language under meta ethics, where the emotional attitude towards an action is the primary evidence. As humans, we generally confuse our emotions for reality which results in extreme disagreements within our contemporary news platforms.
Emotions proceeding facts causes frenzies between social groups. The subatomic pressure of choosing sides puts many people against each other on social media.
Despite the outrage between social groups on social media, the frequent sharing and retweeting of news on Facebook and Twitter comes across as a testimony of endorsing a view or an opinion. However studies show that 60 percent of people that share post on social platforms don’t even read the material. People would rather share an article than to read it. Could we as a whole, be confused on why or what information we are sharing?
It seems as if people like to share articles that would get people riled up without even knowing what the full article is even about. There was an exprirament done on Twitter not to long ago with the title, Marijuana Should Be Legal, but once the article is clicked on, a small paragraph explains how this post is an experiment appears. Somehow the article got over a thousand retweets and numerous comments stating that the article was interesting.
Post that conveys strong emotions are 20 percent more likely to be shared. The outrage that’s experienced online does not transfer offline as much. Perhaps because the social welfare is less risky to keep the anger online.
With that said, the majority of post and news shared online isn’t meant for spreading information rimarily. The hidden agenda beneath sharing content for most people is to signal their outrage and emotions subconsciously, with the hopes that others will share. Even though most people aren’t aware of this, the hidden agenda actually works psychologically. The deficit of awareness that trolls have as they post these articles that elicit their emotions makes them easy marks for journalists. Day by day, misinformation controls our nation.
Sacred Thinking 