What Fake News is NOT

Some people will mislabel rumors, hoaxes, and real news stories they don’t like as “fake news.” Another area of confusion is stories that result from mistaken or bad journalism.  

Sometimes well-respected news organizations get it wrong: sources can lie, documents can be faked, and reporters can mishear quotes. Sometimes new information changes the basic understanding of what is known publicly. You wouldn’t call this fake news since the motivation for posting the original (but mistaken) information wasn’t to deceive. What can make the situation worse: is the financial pressure of shifting away from legacy media (like newspapers) into the digital world, leaving the news industry scrambling to figure out how to support quality journalism financially. 

Between the pressure to meet social media engagement quotas and competition with other publications, writers often don’t get the necessary time to craft thoughtful and nuanced stories—or possess the power to reject an assignment over concerns about amplification.

Inaccurate details, such as reporting that four people are dead in a plane crash instead of six, can result from an honest mistake. The wrong number might have been heard or written down.

During breaking news, information will quickly shift as bits trickle into news organizations. It takes time to get a clear overall picture of what’s happening. Sometimes law enforcement officials or public relations professionals get the story wrong and send inaccurate information. At those times, news organizations are simply repeating mistakes. This is most likely to happen when only one source of information available whenever a story breaks.

Legitimate news sources will report the truth—as best they know it at the time. But as new information comes in, the story can shift. Just like with scientific research, this meandering pathway is just part of the process of getting to the truth.

It’s worth noting that the approach of legacy news organizations (The Washington Post, CNN) differs from new media outlets (BuzzFeed News, Politico). Traditional outlets aim at objectivity or neutral-voice reporting, where the focus is on being balanced, keeping the journalist’s opinions out of reports. More recently launched news sites are likely to focus on immediacy and transparency over neutrality and update readers whenever more information is known. Each approach presents different weaknesses for reporters to overcome. Of course, commentators may reference news information but are not acting as neutral reporters. Opinion pieces are often confused with basic news reporting. Pay attention whether you are reading a news report, an editorial, a guest blogger, a review, a disguised ad, or a comment.

The bottom line: be skeptical and bring a critical mind with you to everything you read. Keep in mind that “fake news” can be about something else besides the truth. As University of Southern California media scholar Mike Ananny has said, it is often “a struggle between [how] different people envision what kind of world that they want.”

Here are some tips for determining if a story is likely reliable. An organization does not need to tick off all these qualifiers in order to be considered authentic and accurate, but the more you see red flags pop up, the more a healthy skepticism is in order.

You’ll notice these are “tips” and not a checklist. Checklists can oversimply the nuances of discernment into black-and-white boxes.

More about spotting fake news