All of you uninformed Facebook-gossipers will soon have to critically think about what you spread online! Researchers from the University of Sheffield are currently developing a social media lie-detector to separate fact from fiction on various social websites.
Pheme technology examines a source’s reliability by seeking corroborating information and by tracking the evolution of online discussions of various topics. Kalina Bontcheva, a Pheme senior researcher, said in an interview with the Deccan Chronicle, “Pheme will be able to identify false information by looking at the news source, conversations that stem from the tweet, and even the tweet’s language.”
In a world rank with uninformed web-gossip concerning every topic under the sun, this type of technology seems a little ambitious and even intimidating. If it succeeds, though, it could not only spotlight those who fall into shameless Internet gossip-traps, but also benefit media industries that have deteriorated in recent years, including today’s news media.
In a time where the state of journalism is rapidly worsening due to corporate interests, capitalist influence, and lack of thorough investigation, Pheme could be a starting point for steering mainstream news reports in the direction of truth and greater public service.
Currently, reporters all over the world, including many from the CBC, are relying on social media to write and deliver their stories. Social media has transformed the way news is created, dispersed and delivered. But, reporters are now wrongly seeking validation of facts simply through social media. I’ve even seen posts on Globe and Mail asking the public to verify the components of in-development news stories.
Pheme could provide more accuracy to those speedy, cheap-to-cover headlines.
Are the responses trustworthy? Maybe. Are they biased? More than you’d think. Most importantly, are these news sources questioning them appropriately? I don’t think so.
Social media has provided a plethora of journalists with an avenue for laziness. Before networks came into play, reporters had to be passionate about what they wrote, to independently and thoroughly investigate any story, rather than simply relying on the plentitude of shady sources available online.
Why use other, more efficient means for finding truth when you can ask Joe Schmoe on Twitter? Who cares if he’s politically biased and may not know all the facts? The story will be out real quick. Then we can move on to more pressing matters, like which celebrity has been cheating on which.
Of course, this isn’t the case for all journalists; there are many individuals and alternative news outlets dedicated to reporting the objective truth, and I applaud them!
But by instantly searching for validity in current events, Pheme’s fact-checking technology would not only help demand that those slacking, computer-based reporters think critically about their jobs, but may also help provide accuracy to those speedy, cheap-to-cover headlines.
As there is no turning back from online methods, Pheme may actually bring about new attitudes toward the subjects journalists cover, and the way they must cover them.
Put simply, I would rather have fewer reliable stories, than more of lower quality. I would rather be uninformed than misinformed. Hopefully, Pheme will discourage rumour-based reporting and aid journalists in their sometimes overwhelming pursuit of news.
