Credit: Getty
Whatever you think about it, ‘fake news’ is one of the terms of our era. Last year Collins gave it the accolade of ‘word of the year’. The UK Parliament’s Culture, Media and Sports Committee is carrying out an investigation into the phenomenon. The US President this week announced the winners of his unilaterally held ‘fake news awards’.1 The French President, Emmanuel Macron, has a number of times promised not merely to battle fake news but to actually ban it, especially during elections. Battling fake news would appear to be an attractive and enobling place to be.
To be opposed to ‘fake news’ is to award yourself not only the role of arbiter of what is true and what is fake, but the position of someone who is themselves putting out (or giving an imprimatur to) true news. It is a position that is enormously flattering. When the New York Times or CNN present themselves as opposing ‘fake news’ they suggest not only that they can identify what is false but that what they are putting out themselves is truthful. With digital platforms snapping at the old media’s heels, this is a particularly propitious meme for such media to push. The old media can suggest that while they hold the flame of truth it is the upstart new media who have let all the sluices up and allowed the whole pitch to be spoiled. This attitude is not just morally advantageous for them but also potentially financially advantageous. What a joy it is when these two things just happen to coincide.
But if everyone in politics and the media does not wish to die in a great circular firing squad, all clinging to their own ideas of what is fake or not, it might be worth trying to agree on some standards.
The first is a recognition that there are at least three broad categories of what is now called ‘fake news.’ These are
- News that is wholly made up.
- News that is partially made up.
- News that may be true but which fits a particular ideological slant.
Of course within these different varieties of fake news no media company or individual is necessarily guilty of consistently putting out just one particular variety. Certainly there are numerous websites that put out the first version. They tell you the ‘truth’ about the assassination of JFK and often go on to promise in pushed adverts that assure you that you can earn a fortune by working from home or promise to grow parts of the reader’s anatomy. These sites push the first variety of fake news but the mainstream media can also on occasion push the first variety. They get a story wrong or report a story that is based on nothing.
More often with the old media, they print or report stories which, while not entirely made up, are substantially inaccurate. And as Tim Montgomerie has pointed out, this type of fake news is not confined to the media. It has polluted purportedly ‘factual’ television dramas.
For the print and broadcast news media these stories – inaccuracies in otherwise accurate stories, or stories which contain truth and also demonstrable error, are their Achilles heel. Even today when a mainstream journal is found to have wholly or partially made up a story, or aspects of a story, there is a severe reputational price to pay as an institution. The New Republic did not benefit from the Stephen Glass affair, any more than the New York Times benefited from having the proven fabulist Jayson Blair among their reporters.
However, far more common – and what many people seem to mean when they say ‘fake news’ – is the third definition. Not so much making up stories, but slanting the news agenda by reporting something things in a particular way and reporting others in a different way or in no way at all. President Trump identifies as ‘fake news’ not only stories that are inaccurate or made up, but stories which focus on something he does not think the media should focus on and failing to focus on something he believes they should focus on. Of course it is not really accurate to call this ‘fake news’, but it is proving a helpful new way to pour scorn on those who editorialise in a direction we – whatever our views – simply do not like.
There was a fine demonstration of this over the past week. In Canada a young girl was reported to have had her headscarf (or hijab) cut by a stranger. The story was taken up by news media around the world. The BBC ran it with the headline: “Toronto police investigate ‘scissor attack’ on girl’s hijab.” The story went on, ‘Canadian police are investigating a possible hate crime after a man tried to cut the hijab off a young girl. Khawlah Noman, 11, was walking to school with her brother in Toronto when they said a man came up behind her with scissors. Miss Noman said she screamed and her assailant ran, only to return, pull off her hood and cut her hijab.’2 Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was among those to leap onto the story. ‘”My heart goes out to the young girl who was attacked, seemingly for her religion’ he said. ‘I can’t imagine how afraid she must have been. I want her and her family and her friends and community to know that that is not what Canada is.’ 3
Not only was this “not what Canada is” it also turned out not to be true. Within days it transpired that – in the words of the Canadian police: “After a detailed investigation, police have determined that the events described in the original news release did not happen.” 4 The more reputable news sources reported this, but few gave it the prominence they had given the original story. The story itself turned out to be the first variety of fake news. But the spin it received – and the prominence it was given – was also a demonstration of the third type.
By comparison, very close to the time that this non-attack on a girl’s headscarf was spread across the world’s media, a Jewish teenager in Paris had her face slashed by an unknown assailant. The attack (on 13th January) which is believed to be an anti-Semitic attack, occurred in the Paris suburb of Sarcelles. So far as I can discern this story has only been reported in the Jewish and Israeli press.5 It has not been reported by mainstream media, and has not gathered even a modicum of the coverage afforded to the non-existent hijab cut.
This is the sort of thing that irritates people – from every imaginable direction. And it is the perfect meeting place of the first type of fake news with the third. The editorialising of a non-event and the ignoring of a real event. We will be hearing a lot more of ‘fake news’ in the years ahead. It is to the benefit of too many people for it to disappear swiftly. But to avoid the circle-shoot we should at least consider ways in which to diminish the phenomenon. I can think of none which would be more effective than that the mainstream media recognise (and admit to) those occasions when they have engaged in the very practices which they claim to abhor.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“The reaction of the French government — threatening to switch off the 90% of Jersey electricity which comes by cable from Normandy — was vastly over the top.”
If someone threatens a small Crown Dependency with that, and with cutting off food and medicine via-blockade, then that is serious. I’m fed up of all the “calm sensible people” (TM) waiving that away. Threatening to cut off electricity deserves all the breathless hype the papers can muster. Jersey did NOT deserve that threat.
We shall have to liberate them , like the Falklands-perhaps a flotilla of boats from England like Dunquirk?
We have yet to avenge the capture of H.M.S. Blazer in 1993.
I gather her Commander was exonerated at his Court Martial.
Rumour has it he had asked for permission to ‘open fire’ but was all too predictably denied by the supine incumbent of No 10.
Agreed. Surely the actions of a civilised, normal country would be to invoke the legal dispute procedures that are set out. Instead the French take direct action. In what way is France’s action any different from Putin’s Russia – in Putin’s case threatening to cut off energy supplies to Ukraine and mounting a blockade?
Thanks for this analysis of the fishing dispute in Jersey, I only wish our broadcast media offered such clarity.
Back in 1993 under perhaps the feeblest PM since records began there was a very similar humiliating incident that received very little coverage at the time.
A confrontation with French fishermen led to the capture of our Patrol Boat,
H.M.S. Blazer.*. Her crew were confined below decks, she was towed into Cherbourg harbour in triumph and her White Ensign ceremonially burnt!
The intervention of the French Navy finally secured her release.
How Nelson,Hawke,Rodney and others too numerous to mention must have “rolled in their graves”!
Let us hope History is not about to repeat itself.
(* the eponymous Jacket, beloved of Cricket Clubs etc, takes its name from a previous H.M.S. Blazer)
Tell the Frog eating chancers that the same should apply to the waters of Saint Pierre and Miquelon!
An excellent idea, thank you.
Cheese eating surrender monkeys?Don’t we love to hate foreigners?
Particularly the Scotch!
Well mainly Nicola Braun Sturgeon ..&her Stasi acolytes
Scotch. That’s a drink. Single malts are the best!!!
Actually a lot of them live in London and are key politicians , civil servants , secret service etc etc. I did suggest that SNP take over London ( a sort of Khan-Sturgeon principality like Luxembourg)-and join their fellow country-men and leave Scotland alone.
“The noblest prospect which a Scotchman ever sees, is the high road that leads him to England !*
(* Dr Samuel. Johnson , no relation)
It is a term coined by Homer Simpson, but it did catch on a bit over here despite us having plenty of our own derogatory term for our historic enemy . The antipathy between England and France goes back over a millennium
Yes though we also keep our anti-Dutch expressions, as far as I know both countries are now friendly. Hitchens also seemed to enjoy the latest installment of that long running drama England versus France. However they are allowed to get away continually with bad behaviour. They allowed their fishermen to behave in a threatening way & did not send their navy. That is reserved for escorting people who prefer our benefits to theirs across the channel.
BoJo needs to tread water carefully, Les Malouines was the original name of the Falklands after their discovery by St Malo seafarers and having been mistaken for English tourists in a St Malo bar many years ago during the battle for the Malvinas the name Thatcher and L’Exocet were muttered loudly for us to hear to the embarrassment of the Patron .
There is a growing tension in France against Macron over extreme acts by Islamic groups including the beheading of a teacher and the burning of another Catholic Church…France is one of the oldest Catholic Churches in Christendom, and there are many retired military who are watching Macron with great anxiety to see if he has the bottle for the battle…I wouldn’t risk a war over a few whelks !
Besides and possibly of greater import, Britain has dispatched an Aircraft carrier to the South China sea and needs to act carefully and consistently so that the CCP cannot find excuses for their oft repeated designs on Taiwan
“Britain has dispatched an Aircraft carrier to the South China sea “
Utter cobblers. Our new toy is going for its first trip. It is going to many places on the way and when it gets to the far east it will spend a short while exercising with old friends – ever heard of the Five Powers Defence Agreement? then it will turn round and come home again.
I wouldn’t want to count on New Zealand any longer. PM Jacinda Ardern and her cabinet seem to be fans of the CCP.
I stand with the French over the Islamic beheading though. Islam is in the Jihadi holy war phase with the whole non Islamic world and especially the West. The global Umma has been called for and funded by the House of Saud’s vast oil wealth.
I attended school in St Malo a few years before the Falkland Islands dust up but even then was very careful to identify as an American rather than a Brit. I was in Buenos Aires about 6 months after the dust up and again made sure that I was identified as American.
Wheras the 3 (?) million French people who live in Britain will have nothing to fear.A few years ago a young French woman came to Britain to visit a relative-unfortunately she was murdered by a lorry driver. To catch him the police stopped every lorry ( so they can be efficient when they try) and apprehended him. Contrast to muder of a school-girl in France , whose death didn’t interest their police -the case was later solved by an American policeman on holiday there.
I think Jersey should be as nice to the French as the French have been to the UK in the past.
What’s the fishing equivalent of burning live lambs in their transports?
Burning live lambs? Could you please expand I must have missed that one.
I’m not sure how many instances there were but at one point French farmers set fire to transports carrying lambs (might have been adult sheep).
Sadly you are correct!
Apparently in 1990, 219 lambs were burnt alive when angry French farmers highjacked a British lorry and set fire to it.
Perhaps we shouldn’t have bothered to save them from Adolph &Co?
Well we have been at war with each other for the best part of thousand years
My favourite meat, roast lamb.
And poured away Spanish wine on the French border-the French know how to have a good argument & who thought we would be at war with them so soon?
Burning lambs reminds me rather of
Oradour-sur- Glane.
It was an awful thing to do & I didn’t mean to trivilize it.
No you didn’t!
I was just musing on the barbarity of that species of African Ape, now known as Human beings. ,
I’m feeling rather hysterical as its odd to live through history & I rather suspect we are in for a big war somewhere-too similar to the 1930’s.They seem to want to use Ukraine as the excuse, then possibly start war with Russia?
“But, surprise, surprise, it was agreed on 24 December …”
Subtle use of the passive voice there, John. Who was pushing for this in the negotiations? My money is on the Commission, and more fool the French for agreeing.
Cod War I, II, and III need to be taught in history books as they were some of the world’s most earth shaking Wars. They re-drew all the world’s maps. They changed the world for ever. USA, and UK used this issue to finally fix maritime law for the new world. It was infact cod being the issue, but it was not really about cod at all, it was carving up the world’s oceans into finally a just system using cod as the cover..
They were not actually about cod, they were about establishing the 200 mile Zone.
“An exclusive economic zone extends from the baseline to a maximum of 200 nautical miles (370.4 km; 230.2 mi), thus it includes the contiguous zone.[4] A coastal nation has control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources. However, it cannot prohibit passage or loitering above, on, or under the surface of the sea that is in compliance with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal State in accordance with the provisions of the UN Convention, within that portion of its exclusive economic zone beyond its territorial sea. Before the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982, coastal nations arbitrarily extended their territorial waters in an effort to control activities which are now regulated by the exclusive economic zone, such as offshore oil exploration or fishing rights (see Cod Wars). Indeed, the exclusive economic zone is still popularly, though erroneously, called a coastal nation’s territorial waters.”
Well stop paying it! I stopped over 20 years ago. Actually I never started, one way and another, even though there was a time when I liked and respected the BBC.
Boats under 12 metres don’t need “satellite gear” they can fit an ordinary AIS Class B transponder for a few hundred euros. It’s not difficult and the prices have come down since I did it on my (sailing) boat over a decade ago.
Anyway, judging from the tracking sites during the “lunch party” to St Helier, they’ve all got AIS anyway.
AIS is much more helpful than radar as it gives you more info. about the target vessel.