The future of journalism stands at a crossroads. The art of deceptive news, once perfected by foreign governments to sow division and confusion among American voters, has spurred an abundance of homegrown copycats.
Look no further than the staggering fabrications swirling around Hurricane Helene relief efforts to see how bad actors are generating a firehose of falsehoods with every deep fake, false meme and — let’s not sugarcoat it — lie.
The baseless claims, such as money for hurricane victims being redirected to house undocumented immigrants, led the federal government to publish its own “Rumor Response” page. On Monday, FEMA officials in North Carolina paused some recovery efforts after reported threats against staffers by an “armed militia.” Gov. Roy Cooper (D) said his office was informed about the threats, as well as “significant misinformation online” tied to recovery efforts.
Disinformation, false information deliberately spread to mislead and deceive the public, has been worsening for years, taking a troubling toll on accuracy, facts and information writ large. Weeks away from a presidential election, the situation is reaching a breaking point as journalists are forced to be firewalls against falsehoods while simultaneously being attacked by political leaders and partisan influencers while just trying to do their jobs.
The current state of affairs is an outgrowth of an unhealthy information ecosystem that developed over many years, where clicks became more important than substance, polarization trumps nuance and influencers outweigh institutions. Now, on the precipice of greater confusion and chaos, it’s clear that reporters need the public’s help.
The solutions aren’t easy. But here’s the good news: Evidence shows numerous opportunities for citizens to pitch in.
As a first step, the public must better understand the scope of this escalating threat and why journalists and newsrooms are increasingly hard-pressed to respond on their own.
After nearly a quarter-century in journalism, most recently as an editor at The Washington Post, I joined an urgent initiative this year at PEN America to work with reporters in more than 100 newsrooms. We spoke with editors covering diaspora communities who reported that their audiences are inundated with false information. Similarly, we saw reporters covering rural and urban areas seeking to break through social media lies to rebuild trust.
Again and again, from small nonprofits in the Midwest to large media corporations in New York, the striking takeaway I heard was the same: The challenges posed by fighting false narratives are felt throughout the sector, and are getting harder.
Our research has borne this out: 90 percent of reporters have altered their journalistic practices because of disinformation, and 27 percent say it now takes “far longer” to finish a story. Each minute spent batting down a false claim is time that could be used to cover important developments in communities.
At the same time, efforts to research and mitigate harmful disinformation have been paralyzed by legal threats or swamped by partisan congressional investigations. And social media platforms that once ramped up efforts to counter disinformation have scaled back on content moderation, dismantling tools that independent researchers once relied upon.
This has given free rein to algorithms and other digital tools designed to prioritize user engagement, which amplifies the most inflammatory and misleading content. It’s left journalists and newsrooms increasingly burdened to combat these threats.
This task is made more difficult by the worsening financial realities of the journalism industry. The rise of nonprofit and digital-only newsrooms is encouraging, but the closure in recent years of more than 2,000 newspapers — with layoffs among many of those that remain — has meant a troubling decline in reporters covering local communities.
A Washington Post analysis showed newspaper publishing job losses represented the steepest percentage drop among 532 industries tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Many news organizations are trying mightily to fight the scourge of disinformation, but the public might not appreciate or understand those labor-intensive efforts.
Fairly recent approaches gaining momentum include proactively inoculating readers ahead of planned news events through prebunking (For example: “The election results might be delayed. Here’s why that’s OK”) and incorporating transparency and media literacy into coverage (For example: “How we investigated this story”).
This is also made harder by the sobering reality that trust in the news media hovers near an all-time low, fueled by widening skepticism emanating from political extremes and often amplified by government officials and candidates.
For citizens looking to do their part, altering social media usage is a significant starting point. As social media platforms pull back on content moderation, partisan bubbles grow and generative AI becomes both more sophisticated and easier to use, news consumers and journalists are left to construct their own guardrails.
That process should include exercising caution before amplifying information that elicits powerful emotions, so take a pause and fact-check before sharing that provocative meme. Disinformers construct narratives to circumvent our rational analysis, leading us to acceptance and, in some cases, the “share” button.
Other ways to assist include diversifying one’s media consumption when routinely exposed to a single viewpoint, while also considering the credibility of news sources and platforms. In discussions with friends and family members, use compassion and understanding with those who have fallen down a disinformation rabbit hole.
One area we are pursuing is showing promise in its early stages: helping community members who are committed to sharing factual information and having sensitive conversations as “trusted messengers.”
Samuel Woolley, a disinformation researcher at the University of Pittsburgh, noted during a PEN America convening of journalists and researchers earlier this month that “disinformation is particularly potent when it comes from someone you care about, but solutions to this problem are also potent when they come from someone you care about.”
Despite these daunting challenges, our team still encountered a surprising reaction to disinformation: optimism. For all the unknowns ahead, this sense of hope permeates. After all, journalists wake up each morning to better inform the public.
The technology and information landscape is advancing more quickly than many of our fellow citizens can adapt. No single countermeasure will be sufficient, but all of us can play a role in building a healthier climate for information and trust and helping journalists through this deluge.
Tim Richardson is a former journalist and Washington Post editor who leads PEN America’s journalism and disinformation program.