Thom Watt: There is nothing new about fake news

Fake news has been the buzzword of 2017. It could well have been the phrase of 2016. It could also have been the hot topic of 1917, 1717, 1523 or any other year you'd care to think of.
Tim Berners-Lee envisaged the internet as connecting peopleTim Berners-Lee envisaged the internet as connecting people
Tim Berners-Lee envisaged the internet as connecting people

Shareable articles, designed to appeal to our inherent political bias have come into focus in recent months. Stories written by Macedonian teenagers, with the intention of disseminating incorrect information about political opponents sounds like something from a ­William Gibson cyberpunk novel – but it is happening.

While the legitimacy of our news is obviously a concern, it has to be treated with caution. We shouldn’t think it’s anything new.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

This issue can be brought into focus by a dirty, mud-slinging American election, where facts are scarce, racial issues bubble under the surface and the result is debated months after a declaration. But that could apply to 1876 as readily as 2016.

Equally, we must be careful that our search for the black and white version of events doesn’t exclude the world’s multiple shades of grey.

In the early days, the internet was fairly self-regulating. The most ­popular sites were standardised; news came from respected news-providers, weighted opinion came from people we knew and fringe beliefs came from millions of peripheral sites. As the web has grown, some of those peripherals have snowballed, amalgamated, gained credibility and following and moved inwards. Often, perhaps even in the majority of cases, this has been a positive, progressive step. Buzzfeed, the Huffington Post, Mashable and no end of hard-working bloggers have evolved into respectable news providers in the last decade, many with far more legitimacy than some of the ‘traditional’ titles. It’s also given that same platform and opportunity to hate groups, conspiracy theorists and bark-at-the-moon lunatics. Unfortunately, to protect opinion we need to defend the indefensible.

Which brings us to the most ­difficult issue of all; the “accepted version of events” changes very quickly. Disputing that can be ­hugely admirable. Agreed facts around the Hillsborough inquest, Jimmy Savile scandal, even the ­possibility of life on the moons of Saturn have all fundamentally changed in the last few years. We must be aware of where we’re ­getting our news, and of political bias, but these are not new ideas and must not be at the cost of ­discussion.

The internet was created to share opinions. What has changed is the range of opinions presented to us. Some are presented as personal ­stories, some are inspirational, some are “outrageous, politically incorrect opinions which they have to a deadline, for money” (to quote Stewart Lee), but they’re opinions, and they’re what the internet is for.

Tim Berners-Lee envisaged that “the web does not just connect machines, it connects people.” He would know.

Strip opinion from the internet and you’re left with illegal downloads, pornography and illegal downloads of pornography.

Social media is all about opinion, and as such, it has made what we think far more important than what we know. Isn’t that what we’d otherwise call imagination?

Thom Watt works as head of digital for a Glasgow-based company.