Facebook and Google are working hard – now – to undermine the power and influence of fake news sites which rely on the two internet giants for their success. Why now? The likely answer is that the candidate overwhelmingly supported by Silicon Valley and the big money which fuels it, lost the presidential election and many think that happened, at least in part, because of voters influenced to support Donald Trump by the stories spread by those sites.
It’s not like Google and Facebook didn’t know fake news sites existed beforehand, and they certainly made plenty of money from them. They just didn’t care all that much until it brought about a result they didn’t like. There is a lesson in there for all of us, even if we aren’t internet giants, regarding the circumstances under which we take action, and when we choose to sit by and do nothing.
After telling us all for years that they would exercise little to no editorial control over the content spread by them, FB and G are now swinging into serious action. But as much as I detest fake news, whether it influenced this election or not, there is something at least a little “off” here, not to mention that it may miss the most effective way to undermine the fake news peddlers’ influence.
Do we really want Facebook and Google to determine what is and isn’t a hoax, then edit and shape what we see, based on their determination? What criteria would be used to make such a determination? Would it require limiting or outing The Onion or The Daily Show from our newsfeeds? What about religion news based on the premise that Jesus actually rose from the grave 2,000 years ago, or that God descended upon Mount Sinai 1,200 years before that in order to give the Israelites 10 Commandments? Perhaps it would decide that Stephen Hawking’s prediction that the world will be destroyed within 1,000 years, as he did this week, should also not be covered as news.
Direct threats of violence, spreading hateful words or images which directly inspire terrorism, etc. These are things which should be policed and prohibited from reaching a wider audience. Fake news? As offensive as it is, I think that we, not some corporation, are the most important and effective firewall. And the building of that firewall begins by appreciating that fake news spreads, not simply because people are stupid or lazy, but because fake news often speaks to real emotions.
We often want to believe the very worst about those we oppose, and so we spread the most outrageous stories which reflect that worst, often with greater speed than those who like the story in question may do so. Why? Because, more often than we realize or want to admit, it feels so good to know how bad “those people” we oppose really are, right? The only problem is that such sanctimony, however emotionally satisfying it may be for some of us, is a really dangerous self-indulgence, as we are now learning.
And for those who actually agree with the fake news stories they are spreading, it probably pays to ask what speaks to you about the story you are sending. More often than not, it is likely to be a deep emotional resonance about the issue at hand – an emotional resonance that runs so deep, it shuts down any capacity to question or challenge. Hardly the best way to consume almost anything, regardless of how good it sometimes feels to have the news so totally confirm our understanding of events.
Bottom line is that whether we spread fake news because we hate the story or we love the story, we are most susceptible precisely because of the real emotion evoked by the fake news. Perhaps if we all remembered that, then we, not some company, could better control of stories ranging from silly to total BS, and in so doing, preserve both maximum freedom and maximum responsibility. That’s always a tall order, I know, but one I hope we are up to, especially given the alternatives.
Listed for many years in Newsweek as one of America’s “50 Most Influential Rabbis” and recognized as one of our nation’s leading “Preachers and Teachers,” by Beliefnet.com, Rabbi Brad Hirschfield serves as the President of Clal–The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, a training institute, think tank, and resource center nurturing religious and intellectual pluralism within the Jewish community, and the wider world, preparing people to meet the biggest challenges we face in our increasingly polarized world.
An ordained Orthodox rabbi who studied for his PhD and taught at The Jewish Theological Seminary, he has also taught the University of Pennsylvania, where he directs an ongoing seminar, and American Jewish University. Rabbi Brad regularly teaches and consults for the US Army and United States Department of Defense, religious organizations — Jewish and Christian — including United Seminary (Methodist), Yeshivat Chovevei Torah (Modern Orthodox) Luther Seminary (Lutheran), and The Jewish Theological Seminary (Conservative) — civic organizations including No Labels, Odyssey Impact, and The Aspen Institute, numerous Jewish Federations, and a variety of communal and family foundations.
Hirschfield is the author and editor of numerous books, including You Don’t Have To Be Wrong For Me To Be Right: Finding Faith Without Fanaticism, writes a column for Religion News Service, and appears regularly on TV and radio in outlets ranging from The Washington Post to Fox News Channel. He is also the founder of the Stand and See Fellowship, which brings hundreds of Christian religious leaders to Israel, preparing them to address the increasing polarization around Middle East issues — and really all currently polarizing issues at home and abroad — with six words, “It’s more complicated than we know.”