Introduction
Social media has become a significant news distribution platform both locally and abroad. Users continue to be exposed to dubious material regarding its integrity, including conspiracies, sensationalism, hyper-partisan content, pseudoscience, and even made-up “fake news” pieces. Due to the quick spread of information through platforms like social media, podcasts, and the news, prejudice and misleading information are significant problems in today’s media-saturated society. The prevalence of misleading information should not be surprising, considering how well-paying spam and internet fraud are for con artists and how lucrative political and government propaganda is for both sides (Zimmer et al., 2019). Yet, the quick and wide propagation of false information leaves room for its manipulation by both individual users and the underlying algorithms of social media platforms. Journalism that is prejudiced or spreads misleading information can have serious repercussions for individuals and entire communities. This essay examines the negative impacts of media bias and Misinformation on society and suggests ways to stop them from spreading.
The Social Effects of False Information and Bias in the Media
The general public’s interpretation of the news is greatly impacted by media bias and Misinformation. In addition to uncertainty and mistrust, incorrect information can cause harm. False information exposure can also harm society through group fragmentation, intolerance of dissent, and political segregation. Also, it could influence the collective decision-making of the group. Because of false information disseminated through various media during the COVID-19 epidemic, for example, many people disregarded health recommendations, undertook dangerous treatments, and even refused vaccinations. If more people accept false beliefs about politics, social issues, and scientific facts, our society may become more discriminatory, polarized, and violent.
However, media bias might result in inaccurate or partial data publication. People may develop prejudiced ideas due to the unbalanced presentation of many viewpoints that prejudice might produce. Numerous studies have demonstrated that media bias influences readers’ comprehension of and responses to breaking news. For instance, when news outlets have a slant toward one political party over another, they may present the information in a way that helps one party while downplaying or disregarding the news that supports the other. As so many people rely on the media for news and information, any bias they display could impact how their viewers feel about politics, the parties they support, and how they vote (Bauer et al., 2022). Biased reporting in the media is a problem made worse by the effects of the selective exposure theory: Psychologists have long recognized that people frequently ignore data that contradict their views in favour of those that do. One can readily reinforce such notions without changing their perspective by selecting evidence supporting their previous opinions. By doing this, the chance of encountering cognitive dissonance is eliminated.
The Case of Joe Rogan Podcast and News Outlets giving different information.
The Joe Rogan Podcast and other programs of a similar nature frequently feature different points of view on an issue from various news organizations and media platforms. Popular podcaster Joe Rogan has a big fan base on Spotify. Each week, more than 11 million people listen to his podcasts. It is a tremendous accomplishment. Joe Rogan is renowned for conducting frank conversations with fascinating individuals. Others claim that Joe Rogan’s podcast contributes to the spread of false information. The most popular podcast on Spotify, The Joe Rogan Experience, is anticipated to be quite expensive for the business in 2020. Every month, allegedly, 200 million copies are downloaded. Although the American broadcaster features a wide range of guests who give their perspectives on various issues on the show, some episodes have included inaccurate and misleading statements (team and R. C. 2022, January 31).
In an interview with Joe Rogan on one of his podcasts, Bret Weinstein, an American author and professor of biology, asserted that the medication ivermectin could treat the avian plague. Several studies that purported to demonstrate the efficacy of this medication in treating Covid were examined by BBC Reality Check. There was no proof that the medicine worked, and several of the studies were of such poor quality that it was obvious the information needed to be falsified. Although numerous countries primarily relying on ivermectin, most notably Brazil and Peru, experienced some of the worst mortality rates from the virus, campaigners frequently cherry-picked favourable stories to buttress their views. So, based purely on these respectable trials, the world’s foremost expert in evaluating medical evidence, Cochrane, concluded that there was “insufficient evidence” to promote the drug.
On the other hand, the news media has covered these stories as well but is constrained by editorial review and professional standards in its reporting. Bruce Sacerdote, a professor of economics at Dartmouth College, gives an example. While watching CNN and PBS cover the Covid-19 meeting the previous year, he observed something. Everything he was learning from the specialists he knew or seeing in the statistics felt terrible. The media concentrated on Covid occurrences since they became more frequent in the US. While cases were rising in certain areas while falling in others, the media chose not to cover them.
Nevertheless, as far as Sacerdote could determine, when vaccination research did start to pay off, it was minimized by the media. He questioned the accuracy of his initial perception in any case. He and two other academics started building a database of Covid coverage from every major network, including CNN, Fox News, Politico, The New York Times, and hundreds of other national and international sources, to be sure. Using a social science methodology, the next step was to identify whether the terms were good, neutral, or negative. The outcomes demonstrated that Sacerdote’s prognosis was accurate, not just because the pandemic has been a generally sobering tale (Leonhardt and D. 2021, March 24).
Ways to mitigate the spread of Misinformation and bias in media.
Because the public relies on journalists to deliver accurate and timely information, reporting the news carries a tremendous responsibility. Many methods for dispelling false information are successful in psychological investigations. Debunking false information after it has already gained widespread distribution is one of them. However, according to (Jolley, D. & Douglas, K. M., 2017), “prebunking,” or protecting individuals from false information before it spreads, is much more effective. One straightforward method for achieving this is to alert readers in advance when a particular piece of information is untrue and to explain why its stated source may be inaccurate or even dishonest on purpose.
Due to the diversity of ways that media bias can appear, such as in the quantity of coverage a certain topic receives or its absence, it can be challenging to identify examples of media bias. This indicates that news consumers routinely encounter biased media without awareness. To solve this problem and encourage critical thinking while reading the news, disclosure of the presence and editorial staff of the media may be necessary. There is evidence that visualizations promote more nuanced news consumption and media bias awareness by, for instance, warning people about potential biases, emphasizing individual incidents of prejudice, or enabling the comparison of contents.
References
Zimmer, F., Scheibe, K., Stock, M., & Stock, W. G. (2019). Fake news in social media: Bad algorithms or biased users?. Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice, 7(2), 40-53.
Bauer, A. J., Nadler, A., & Nelson, J. L. (2022). What is Fox News? Partisan journalism, Misinformation, and the problem of classification. Electronic News, 16(1), 18-29.
team, R. C. (2022, January 31). Joe Rogan: Four claims from his Spotify podcast fact-checked. BBC News. Retrieved March 13, 2023, from https://www.bbc.com/news/60199614
Leonhardt, D. (2021, March 24). Bad news bias. The New York Times. Retrieved March 13, 2023, from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/24/briefing/boulder-shooting-george-segal-astrazeneca.html
Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. M. (2017). Prevention is better than cure: Addressing anti‐vaccine conspiracy theories. Journal of applied social psychology, 47(8), 459-469.
write