Fake News: How Do We Know What Is Real?

When we turn on the television or browse the internet, we aimlessly convince ourselves that the information we are consuming is true. Normally we seek news that pertains to our personal beliefs in the hopes that we can avoid controversial topics. However, as media gains an increasing amount of exposure, we find it more difficult to distinguish between accuracy and personal opinions. This has caused an overwhelming number of media users to spark controversy against topics and reporting information that is not even true. One incidence where this is clearly depicted is through a mini-series on Jimmy Kimmel Live. The well-known talk show host headed to the streets of Hollywood Boulevard where he asked passing pedestrians their opinion on a controversial topic: whether they supported Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act.  Rather than seeking their judgment on the matter, the goal of this interview was to see if the selected few could decipher the fact that the two healthcare laws were the same. Surprisingly enough, those interviewed were unable to spot the mistake and continued to believe ACA and Obamacare were separate.

Chapter 30 introduces us to Agenda-Setting, an objective theory that has been developed by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw. The ideal hypothesis of this theory is that “there is a cause-and-effect relationship between what the news reports and how the public thinks about the world” (367). Distributed into three chronological levels, we arrive at the conclusion that over time, the media is responsible for shaping the public. Level one argues that the media tell us what to think about; however, they don’t tell us how. By measuring the media agenda, McCombs and Shaw were able to establish “position and length of the story as the two main criteria of prominence” (368). After discovering the media and public agendas are correlated, they proceeded into level two, which argues that the media tell us which attributes of issues are the most important. This is achieved through framing, which emphasizes the message they want to portray while avoiding any mention of contrasting viewpoints. If something never passes through that selected frame, it is simply not thought about. As we reach level three, we learn that the media tells us which issues go together for it “examines how the media’s issue map influences the public’s issue map” (372). If issues are repeatedly linked together, an individual might perceive those related reports as intertwined.

 

The curiosity of making it on live television has crossed the minds of millions. We desire recognition and the ability to share this memorable experience with our loved ones. However, we don’t expect this moment to come when we least expect it. As Jimmy Kimmel Live’s “Lie Witness team” selects a random few to get their point of view on their preference of healthcare, we as spectators notice the lack of knowledge media users obtain on various topics. Though this approach is not as long term as the results from Agenda Setting Theory, the persuasion media has on its victims is still portrayed. Jimmy Kimmel uses framing in his proposition by only providing those being interviewed with minimal information. Because they lack access to any other forms of media, they form their answer based on how the question is portrayed. Even those that are aware that Obamacare is a nickname for ACA find themselves doubting what they know is true. This is due to the intimidation media can ignite in others, convincing the public that their information is true even when it isn’t.