Why is the American press also fooled by fake news sites?

In early May, there was a “news” that the owner of the NBA’s Charlotte Hornets basketball club, former superstar Michael Jordan, had threatened to pull the team out of North Carolina if the state did not repeal its law that prohibits transgender people from using the restroom of their choice. However, in reality, this was just a hoax.

Illustration photo. (Source: cjr.org)

According to cjr.org, several websites impersonating major news organizations, including one that clumsily faked the ABC News logo, were among the first to spread false information about Jordan.

The story then spread to other news sites like Metro US, Elite Daily, and the Dallas Voice. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel even used the fake news as a weapon in an editorial opposing the North Carolina law.

I wonder how many times fake news sites—which often claim to be satirical—have fooled journalists with stories like this. But for now, let’s forget about the hoaxers who make up fake news.

The more notable offenders are the companies that enable and reward the promotion of fake news. In an effort to attract traffic and create buzz on social media, some newsrooms have prioritized stories that are sensational and intriguing, but have little value.

This system has allowed fake news sites to develop the most sophisticated ways to trick journalists.

Facebook now allows users to report fake news stories or issue warnings on their News Feed, which has helped reduce the amount of fake news. But unless journalism culture changes from the top down, hoaxes will continue to find their way into the mainstream.

“This approach has received criticism and is by no means universally accepted, but the sites that pursue this strategy are large and attract a lot of people to share their content. News organizations need to recognize the value of their role as intelligent filters in today’s information-rich but also ambiguous and questionable world,” Craig Silverman, editor of BuzzFeed Canada and a pioneer in fighting fake news, said in a report for Columbia University’s Tow Center.

Before that happens, better mechanisms for detecting fake news are needed. Less than a month before the Michael Jordan hoax, a fake ABC news site fabricated a story that the NBA planned to pull an All-Star Game from North Carolina because of transgender bathroom laws there.

Cleveland.com, the online version of The Plain Dealer, quickly reported the story in a news story without verifying the source. “If we had followed the basic steps, we would have known we were dealing with a fake ABC site,” Cleveland.com’s vice president of operations admitted.

It’s not uncommon for major news organizations to fall for fake news. Earlier last year, Bloomberg’s politics section ran a story based on a fake story about Nancy Reagan endorsing Hillary Clinton for president.

In 2013, the Washington Post was also duped by the notorious fake news site Daily Current into reporting that Sarah Palin had joined Al-Jazeera. That same year, a false story about New York Times columnist Paul Krugman’s bankruptcy appeared on Boston.com.

Fake news, the brother of fake news, also made the Los Angeles Times go crazy when it reported that the United Nations was preparing to legalize marijuana, or that mysterious artist Banksy had been arrested...

So how do fake news sites fool journalists? Many fake news sites have catchy, believable names—National Report, World News Daily Report, or Empire News.

Other fake news sites mimic the names and logos of real news organizations, such as abcnews.com.co. Some sites mix real and fake news to deceive.

Most fake news stories use multiple sources, from fictitious spokespersons to real organizations, to appear more credible. The premise of fake news is also often a hot topic that attracts attention.

Another reason for journalists’ gullibility is the pressure to get a story right. Business Insider recently became the most obvious example.

CNN Money reported that Business Insider management requires writers to produce five stories a day. The quantity of stories is more important than the quality of the writing. Many writers must attract up to 1 million page views a month.

Shane Ferro, a former employee of Business Insider, corroborated these claims, saying she was constantly faced with “stressful meetings” when she failed to meet the above goals.

“In some ways, Business Insider is an extreme version of what news organizations now expect from journalists: stories that attract a lot of readers, are produced in a short time, and don’t need editing,” Ferro said.

In recent years, traffic, intense requests for stories, and readership-based bonuses have taken over many news organizations. In 2014, The Oregonian introduced a system of bonuses based on the number of articles and readership it attracts. The Oregonian’s owner, Advance, has similar plans for at least one of its newspapers.

Arienne Thompson, an entertainment reporter for USA Today for the past 10 years, was also fooled by a fake news story about the launch of “selfie shoes” in March 2015.

Thompson doesn't make excuses for her mistakes, but she describes her work this way: “There's always a tug-of-war between publishing quality stories and thinking, 'Just publish them. We need traffic.' The basic tenets of journalism now are these small goals.”

The news industry now seems to view inadvertently repeating fake news as a forgivable mistake. That’s not a bad thing; everyone makes mistakes. But what’s worse is that some newsroom owners are treating these incidents as collateral damage, an unfortunate cost of doing business in the digital age./.

According to Vietnamplus