In a world that’s being increasingly tarnished by widespread dis- and misinformation, fact-checking is and should be made available in all venues possible.
In the past six years, there has been a steady rise in the number of social media users in the Philippines, thanks to the afforable mobile data connection plans of telecoms networks. That, resulted to the increased consumption of Filipinos for content and information from these platforms. In a Pulse Asia survey in September 2021, the firm reported that about 48% access socmed to learn about the latest political news. The same report showed that television and radio remain top sources, with about 91% and 49% of sample size saying that those mediums are their primary source, respectively.
That posts a large threat, still, as a Social Weather Systems study conducted in December 2021 showed that more than half (51%) have said that they find it “difficult” to distinguish fake news. At the same time, as many remain wary about online falsehoods, 70% also rang the alarm on mass media and said that the spread of fake news on tv, radio, and print is “a serious problem.”
Now, as we draw near to the May 9, 2022 polls, massive dis- and misinformation on social media is already (and that is with deep sorrow) a given. However, in the past several debates and interviews, it also bared that such events can also serve as platforms for falsehoods, a then-possibility first raised in an earlier opinion piece on this blog.
To be fair, traditional media, through their massively-followed social media accounts has a clear effort to combat the falsities through a network of fact-checking programs. For example, Rappler, ABS-CBN, News5, among a long-list of partners, have FactsFirstPH, so does Tsek(dot)ph. Other several publications and outlets have their own individual efforts in combating fake news.
As for the big multi-platform media entities, they still have the upper-hand in this situation and the biggest ace that is apparently yet to be fully utilized — their television and/or radio programs. For clarity, this piece would focus on these two media, as the abovementioned data state that they remain the two most-trusted platforms people go to for political coverage. It is in these two that the key in suppressing falsehoods may long have been waiting to be found. So, how could it be possibly done?
Firstly, fact-checks should be expanded and made permanent fixtures in their news bulletins. And no, not just for it be an afterthought in the reports, but to make it a pillar within those programs, a.k.a. a segment. Given the clout that these newscast still have combined in an increasingly internet-reliant society, a fact-checking segment or two should be an effective first step to go against falsehoods.
As of March 22, 2022, TV5’s Frontline Tonight is one of, if not the first, to take a bold step and launch such segment on TV.
Secondly, public affairs programs should also join the bandwagon by introducing a fact-checking segment in their respective shows. Take Brigada on GTV as an example. It had Fact or Fake with Joseph Morong before, and that should be expanded across the other PA shows on GMA, wherever possible. Other networks should also do so, and if are able, create a show centered around debunking lies.
Thirdly, fact-checks could also be in the form interstitials to be played in between programs, especially on news channels and radio stations. This should also be done during the live streaming of these channels or their programs.
Lastly, pop-up intrusions during programs, especially live speeches and debates could also be explored, but this suggestion would only cover TV news stations. For radio, the medium could elect dedicating a recap of a particular speech or debate with fact-checks being the primary purpose for such, with analysis coming in second. Because after all, the foundation for an objective and balanced opinion is hard and real facts.
By doing these first four steps, it could usher in the era of normalization of fact-checking on Philippine mass media, which is still rather conservative than its peers in other parts of the world. But the movement towards normalization shouldn’t and must not end there.
On the side of the public, it is also its duty to verify the source of these fact-checks and reports in gener, especially for those who have the luxury of time. But overall, it is quite easy to do so for everyone, despite the few extra tasks needed to be accomplished.
The first thing to do is to check whether the quote card/art card or a video (especially a fact-check report) is actually posted by the entity that is displayed there. For example, if you see a page named X, posting a fact-check card by Y, one must immediately check out Y and validate if the one that you saw on X was actually true and is indeed a repost. If it is not there, then it is 100% false and must be reported.
If one has already verified its source, they may also opt to check out other re-P-utable (with emphasis on P to not make it F for re-F-utable) outlets who may have the story on such topic. Not only would their knowledge on that particular subject matter will increase, but also their opinion will become enriched.
By doing those little efforts, it could make this fight against dis- and misinformation more effective. Also, keep in mind that the truth is not ever swayed by any political stance as that is the fact, and is and will never be fabricated like a lie or propaganda.
In an ever-changing world where reality has also become debatable, facts are becoming much more elusive to the common folks. The onus is now on the fourth estate to bring that closer to them by making facts both digestable and accessible. Conversely, it is also the job of the public to assess whether the stuff they consume and how they receive those (and rethink when needed).