Could satire get caught in the crossfire of the fake news wars?
The tech giants are taking steps to clamp down on fake news following the US election. But how will this impact satirical news sites? The Onion, The Daily Mash, NewsBiscuit and NewsThump give their thoughts.
It’s an understatement to say that fake news has been an issue during the US election period. Millions and millions of people were taken in by a range of completely fictional stories, from the Pope endorsing Trump to Hillary selling weapons to ISIS.
The chart below from Buzzfeed demonstrates the scale of the problem. People are not just engaging with fake news; it’s getting more traction than stories from genuine, reputable news sites.
There is a huge ethical dilema about whether social networks are culpable for the echo chambers their users create, and many column inches have been dedicated to the issue over the past few weeks.
Both Google and Facebook have promised highly-publicised reforms to the way they approach fake news, from improving the ability to classify misinformation, allowing easier reporting of false content and showing warning flags to disrupting the ad revenue of the sites themselves.
But satirical news sites could get caught in the crossfire of this war between profitable fake news sites and the platforms they use to amplify themselves. If algorithms and flagging systems are used, they could find their reach severely diminished as they get mixed up in the same bag.
So how are these news sites walking that line between falsehood and satire? And are they concerned about the new threats from Google? We caught up with four satirical publishers to find out about their approach.
The Onion
US satirical news site The Onion reaches millions of Americans every day. Head Writer Chad Knackers thinks that the difference between satire and fake news will set them apart.
“Our satire makes a point about society. The Onion never tries to trick anyone” he argued.
Instead, he sees a bigger societal problem with the possibility of satire being flagged as fake news.
“Being “fooled” by an article in The Onion is just a sad reflection of a failing education system and poor reading comprehension. These fake news sites just make up almost believable lies that lack wit and misinform rather than making a comment about the human condition.”
NewsThump
NewsThump are a UK-based satirical and spoof news site. Their website carries a clear but telling disclaimer:
“We are not afraid to skip a few steps like checking facts or corroborating sources, and we never let the truth ruin a funny story (it’s much easier just to make everything up). So, for clarification — If you read a story on here, then you are NOT supposed to believe it. It has been completely made up purely for entertainment purposes.”
Given their open admission to making everything up, are NewsThump concerned that they too will be penalised by Facebook and Google’s tough talking on fake news?
Richard Smith, the Managing Editor at Newsthump is not too worried about the developments for now. “Although the line between satire and ‘fake news’ may appear to be a thin one from the outside, in reality there is a world of difference between sites that are designed to deceive, and those which are designed to entertain,” he said, before asserting “We are most definitely one of the latter.”
But what about those who miss the punchline? Smith believes that the secret to this lies in the quality of the writing:
“If someone shares one of our stories believing it to be true, then we would see that as both amusing (in an unintended consequence kind of way), but also a failure on our part. We want people laughing with us, not outraged by the story they’ve read on our pages.”
Facebook have talked about penalising fake news in their newsfeed algorithms. NewsThump haven’t seen any difference in organic reach yet, but admitted that “until the dust settles, we will just have to keep a close eye on what’s happening”.
“If someone shares one of our stories believing it to be true, then we would see that as both amusing, but also a failure on our part”
“There might be some short term pain along the way, but I’m quite sure that we’ll end up with a solution whereby content is flagged somehow on social media and search engines, but that’s fine with us. I know Facebook trialled a ‘satire’ tag on content from sites such as ours last year, but it was never fully rolled out. There is no reason why they couldn’t extend that functionality, and add a similar ‘fake news’ tag to sites known for such content. I certainly wouldn’t have an issue with that.
“The bigger technical challenge will be when ‘news’ sites pick up fake news and report it themselves, the sort of thing you see on Breibart from time to time. This gives the fake new legitimacy. I think adding a ‘fake news’ tag to their sites would soon encourage a little more fact-checking on their part…”
NewsBiscuit
10-year-old satire site NewsBiscuit is now, for the most part, contributor-led with a team of editors at the top to curate and refine the best stories.
John O’Farrell, Newsbiscuit’s founder was keen to emphasise the clear divide between satire and fake news:
“Good satire should not be misleading in that it should always point to a wider truth about its subject matter” he explained. “When NewsBiscuit says ‘Lego Refuses to Build Trump’s Wall’ — it’s not true but it’s not misleading either; it’s informative because what is obviously a joke says something deeper about how ridiculous Trump’s plans for a wall are.”
This particular piece came from the recent true story that Lego announced they would no longer do promotional deals with the Daily Mail over its “divisive” coverage of migrants. “By expanding this to Trump, it puts both of them in the same camp while creating a funny image of a Lego wall across the Mexican border!” O’Farrell explained.
He also highlighted the necessity for clarity on satirical sites. “As long as NewsBiscuit makes it clear it is a comedy and satire site, I hope that most people will understand that and see it for what it is, jokes about what is in the news, not a site pretending to tell the truth.”
“Somebody once described satire as ‘a distorting mirror in which we see ourselves more clearly’. So I don’t think NewsBiscuit misleads many people, even if occasionally a genuine news outlet believes one of our stories and runs it as if it’s true. That exposes their gullibility, so in a sense NewsBiscuit is providing another public service right there!”
The Daily Mash
The Daily Mash, another popular British satire site, were similarly keen to emphasise the need for quality in satirical pieces. Editor-in-Chief Neil Rafferty believes that the motivation behind it is key:
“I think if you’re doing satirical spoof news properly then it should never be confused with fake news. It should obviously be a joke. Fake news is a deliberate lie. It is disinformation in the service of a political agenda or it’s revenue generating clickbait.
Neil also hopes that a satire label on Facebook would help address the issue and “differentiate between ourselves and the liars”. He is positive about satire not getting caught up in the clampdown.
“As long as we are doing our job properly we don’t see it becoming a big deal”
It seems for now that most of these companies are reliant on the quality of their work keeping them out of the possible algorithm traps being laid.
What remains to be seen is how users respond to any flagging options put in place. It could be argued that, where intelligent, media-literate individuals are able to distinguish and enjoy satire, those who ‘fall for the joke’ are the same people who get caught out by fake news from dubious sources.
