Finding Credible Sources During These Crazy Times We're Living In

C'mon, you know you'd click.

*Sigh, where do I even begin. My lecture on credible sources used to be so succinct and cute. I had a little acronym (courtesy of some awesome librarians) that helped explain how to tell in an online source was credible. CRAP. Currency, Relevance/Reliability, Authority/Audience, Purpose/Point of View. (link for those who want to know more). Sure, the acronym really should’ve been CRRAAPP, but it was a simpler time. 

It can be easy to roll our eyes as our Aunt Kimothy shares yet another clickbait article about scientists secretly plotting to a coup so that killer whales can finally take their rightful place as our overlords. But there are real, important issues at play here. Fake news, biased articles, and flat-out propaganda are harder and harder to distinguish from good, fact-based journalism. Part of this is because of how the internet has evolved. Very few people get their news from print anymore, so the internet is the place to go. But the internet doesn’t have to go through fact-checkers, editors, etc. (although many sites certainly do have stringent editing mechanisms in place). Also, there is a huge financial incentive for content creators to write clickbait articles. Some are accurate with clickbait titles like “You’ll Never Believe What This Ghost Said to Tom Cruise” but some are purposefully inaccurate in an attempt to get people like Aunt Kimothy to hit the “share” button and spread that puppy around, generating advertising revenue with each sucker who clicks. The people behind these types of articles like these Macedonian teens who are in the game to pay for their guitar equipment or this liberal dude who built a fake news empire with fake pro-Trump/anti-Hillary content. 

We know that fake news (as in journalism based in falsehoods, not journalism a certain someone disagrees with) and extreme bias is everywhere. How do we sniff out that putrid, stinking rat? (What a gross expression. My bad!)

Here are four types of sites/articles to keep an eye out for (courtesy of Dr. Melissa Zimdars): 

1. “Fake, false, regularly misleading sites” which rely on “outrage” using distorted headlines and decontextualized or dubious information in order to generate likes, shares, and profits” (examples: Politicalo, AmericanNews.com)  
2. Websites that may circulate misleading and/or potentially unreliable information (examples: ConsciousLifeNews.com, CountdownToZeroTime.com)
3.   These websites sometimes use clickbait-y headlines and social media descriptions (examples: BipartisanReport.com, TheFreeThoughtProject.com
4.  Purposefully fake satire/comedy sites that can offer critical commentary on politics and society, but have the potential to be shared as actual/literal news (examples: Christwire.org, TheOnion.com)

Give them their Pulitzer!

Here are some tips for routing out bad info (also courtesy of Dr. Melissa Zimdars):

1. Avoid websites that end in “lo” ex: Newslo (above). These sites specialize in taking a piece of accurate information and then packaging that information with other false or misleading “facts.”
2.  Watch out for websites that end in “.com.co” as they are often fake versions of real news sources.
3.  Watch out if known/reputable news sites are not also reporting on the story. Sometimes lack of coverage is the result of corporate media bias and other factors, but there should typically be more than one source reporting on a topic or event.
4.  Odd domain names generally equal odd and rarely truthful news.
5.  Lack of author attribution may, but not always, signify that the news story is suspect and requires verification.
6. Check the “About Us” tab on websites or look up the website on Snopes or Wikipedia for more information about the source.
7.  If the story makes you REALLY ANGRY it’s probably a good idea to keep reading about the topic via other sources to make sure the story you read wasn’t purposefully trying to make you angry (with potentially misleading or false information) in order to generate shares and ad revenue.



Uh oh, she needs step #7!

8.  It’s always best to read multiple sources of information to get a variety of viewpoints and media frames. Some sources not specifically included in this list (although their practices at times may qualify them for addition), such as The Daily Kos and Fox News, vacillate between providing legitimate, problematic, and/or hyperbolic news coverage, requiring readers and viewers to verify and contextualize information with other sources

 So here’s your assignment for this post—copy and paste the link to a fake news article. It can be as blatant or as camouflaged as you’d like. Along with the link, I’d like you to provide a paragraph response explaining how you could tell this source wasn’t legitimate. What about it made you question its veracity? When you’ve done this, also respond to one other classmate’s post, adding your take on the linked article they provided. Did you think it was not credible? Were you fooled?