ISSUE: Media Integrity

People consume one or two media sources, but every source is biased. Some are more liberal or conservative, but each panders to a specific audience. It’s unlikely that consumers of these sources consider opposing viewpoints, or see hard numbers outside of a wall of text or rattled off by a newscaster.

STRATEGIES

1. Media Jacking

One approach to fixing this issue of media integrity could be creating a fake website (e.g. the Yes Men’s various websites) that look like the real thing, but aren’t showing what you’d expect. The news you see on this version of CNN, for example, is actually a combination of top stories from the BBC, Al Jazeera, the AP, and other oppositional news sources. To do this, we’d pull the RSS from other news sources and display them as the current stories on the fake site.

The reason behind this is that there’s such a bias on each news station– especially the conservative ones– that don’t report the truth, or completely ignore certain topics. The fake website would show alternative stories that the regular site wouldn’t regularly run, which would be surprising to their regular readers or viewers. Keeping the website looking almost exactly the same would be key, especially to keep the readers engaged. The links to the news stories, if clicked, would lead the reader to another site, obviously making the website a fake.

This would be more a serious take on addressing the fact that news sources don’t report on certain elements, or report incorrect information– propaganda, really– and this wouldn’t be a playful, “Oh, hey, you’re wrong and here’s why,” but a direct display of the wrongheadedness and deceitful news that certain sources report.

2. Culture Jamming

Another approach would an edit of Facebook links that would display sensationalized headlines from major outlets, but would link to different source that has the full story, or an infographic that shows hard numbers for the reader to see, rather than hearing or reading about the cost of certain constructions or proposed budgets.

Our reasoning behind this tactic is that people are much more inclined to follow a clickbait link than a standard link to a 2,000 word opinion piece that dissects a statement or plan with expert interview references and a critical analysis. We live in a world 15 second viral videos and pay more attention to a politicians tweets than another politicians actual experience or interest in a field of which they’re be heading the department– looking at you, Betsy Devos.

This could be incredibly effective, especially if it leads to some sort of infographic that has raw numbers and facts in short bursts, interjected with graphics that are related to the topic. This approach would be much more fun and less of a farcical representation, and the infographics could be promoted as their own piece of data, rather than a subversive link that was a clickbait link.

This would benefit people who generally avoid mainstream news sources, and rely on clickbait articles and unreliable tabloid journalism to remain informed on serious topics. They might be aggravated at being tricked, but a portion of the message might still get through.

3. Identity Correction

A final strategy that could be used would be a simple Twitter fact checker account for mainstream news sources, but rather than fact checking other news sources, it would be correcting the one that it’s supposed to representing. For example, @FOXFactChecker wouldn’t be correcting NBC on behalf of FOX, but correct FOX on behalf of the general public.

A service like this would be useful for people who don’t have a critical approach to consuming information. If the public is only listening to right wing radio talk shows, they take everything NPR says as false liberal news. A fact checker correcting the identity of the news outlet would be citing actual data and cross-referencing sources to keep the source honest– or at least try to inform people of their incorrect statements.

It may be more insulting and aggravating to the news outlet that’s being corrected by a Twitter account using part of their name, but the users who follow it to see the misinformation that the account posts would probably find it much more entertaining and informative. It might also sway those who consume news sources that are being fact checked, but that’s an unknown.