A Language Crisis: The Impact of Fake News on Society

Stephanie Poly April 19th, 2017

Language is a powerful tool that in many cases may be used to motivate people or spur
them to action over a particular cause. Although language has the ability to start positive
movements, however, it also has the ability to ignite violence and hate. Often times, the media
will use the effects of word choice and language in order to stimulate a particular response from
their audience. An issue thus stems from the medias license to express its opinion by using
strong and biased language as libel and slander laws still allow for freedom of speech, a right that
has been abused by the media.
Every journalist has his or her own idea of who is at fault, resulting in persuasive
language that pulls the reader towards a particular belief. Consider the Ferguson shooting in
2014. Some articles discussed how Officer Wilson was simply doing his duty, accused of a hate
crime because some people wanted to create hatred towards white police officers. Others saw it
as a rising issue of race that had still yet to be resolved in the United States. The problem with
this news, however, is not the various opinions that arise from one event, but the amplification of
the event into stories that are not actually true. Following the Ferguson shooting, for instance,
CNN reported that Michael Browns death resulted from his attempt at robbing a liquor store1.
Later it was confirmed that Brown was involved in a drug deal and was returning to the liquor
store to pick up a bag. The supposed robbery was what caused Wilson to pursue Brown and
eventually shoot him2. Yet other sources confirmed that Brown was nowhere near the liquor
store when he was shot. Additionally, video evidence proves he entered the liquor store 11 hours
before he was shot, indicating the shooting was not a result from the alleged robbery3. Other
sources thus tried to argue that Wilson shot Brown with no instigation. Some media sources
claimed that Brown was a kind man with some mild criminal records but was not doing anything
illegal at the time4. Even with pictures and videos it is unclear whether the Ferguson shooting
was due to a hate crime or an officer simply defending himself. This case presents a problem in
our society though: what should we believe? Because there are few facts that everyone can agree
on, citizens cannot even begin to argue whether or not this instance was an act of racism or not.
Fake news is abundant in social media today. Due to its abundance and influential
language, American citizens have been hindered in communicating effectively with others, as
their basis for argumentation is not mutual. Additionally, fake news has stimulated other
problems in society today such as an increase in hate and even violence. It has also ignited an
internal debate within the court system as to what should be considered fact or opinion to not
oppress journalists from exercising their right to freedom of speech. In order to better resolve the
problems that fake news has created in society, libel and slander laws should be restructured to
be more stringent as to prevent fake news articles from being produced and shared on social
media.

THE ISSUES WITH FAKE NEWS

1st Amendment Crisis

Often times, those who write and publish fake news stories go unaffected, however, those
whose reputation is targeted may push for a lawsuit5. As soon as these cases are brought to court,
the matter of fake news becomes more complicated. For one, it must be determined as to what
exactly fake news is. A media network or journalist commonly argues that fake news is simply
opinion pieces. As opinion pieces, certain articles are prevented from suppression as it would
be considered a violation of free speech6. This then changes the nature of a lawsuit, as it becomes
a potential first amendment dilemma. Yet at the same time fake news may be a violation of the
libel and slander laws depending on the wording of the article7. Libel and Slander laws state that
the plaintiff in the lawsuit must prove that the defendant made a false statement8. However,
consider an article written about President Trump calling him out as a racist, sexist pedophile.
The language in such a statement is strong and accusatory however due to the nature of the
statement, it cannot necessarily be proven or disproven depending on how certain people or
media sources interpret President Trumps actions or comments. In cases such as these, when the
plaintiff attempts to sue, the journalist and/or media source claims the statement was an opinion
rather than a fact and therefor falls under first amendment rights9.
As of right now the courts are still having difficultly defining opinion, especially since
the term opinion is so ambiguous. Even if the courts are able to define opinion versus fact,
however, fake news may still inflict damage before the case may even be brought into the courts.
Consider Pizzagate for instance. In a series of viral threads on social media, Hilary Clinton was
accused of using Comet Ping Pong, a pizzeria in DC, as a hub for child trafficking10. In response
to these posts, 28-year-old Edgar Welch walked into Comet Ping Pong with a gun, threatened
that cashier, and began to fire inside the restaurant11. In instances such as these, claiming the
article was an opinion piece has little validity. Accusing the pizzeria of being a hub of child
trafficking came with absolutely no evidence. Even if this case were taken to the courts to
discuss its legitimacy as an opinion piece or not, violence from the article had already been
ignited. Therefore, to resolve this problem, the opinion pieces themselves must be eliminated.

Increase in Hatred and Violence

As the Pizzagate incident demonstrates, fake news has the ability to stir unnecessary
hatred and violence and therefor promote civil unrest. Although Edgar Welch did not end up
killing or injuring anyone, it was still very possible that he could have. The fear he caused the
cashier at the pizzeria as well as those inside the restaurant should not be disregarded either.
Additionally, death threats towards James Alefantis, the pizzerias owner, and a number of his
employees started rolling in on social media. The articles caused many to act out and threaten
Alefantis and his employees12. This just serves as one of many examples of how fake news has
negatively impacted society. Aside from the fact that these fake new articles wronging defaced a
presidential candidate, they also hurt a small business. Not only did Alefantis originally lose
revenue due to this incident, he and his employees were put at potential risk for harm as they
were constantly being threatened for a false accusation13. Furthermore, as the shooting at Comet
Ping Pong proved, the push towards hatred and violence that fake news causes also leads to
higher crime rate. An increase in crime is then fiscally disadvantageous, as court fees as well as a
state prosecutor potentially must be paid for. This money is extracted from American tax dollars
all due to something that was not true to begin with14.

A Reduction in Worldly Knowledge

Because fake news is present in masses and it so accessible via social media, people are
drawn to it in one form or another. Whether people recognize the articles they see as fake news
or not is sometimes irrelevant. The issue that arises is in the form of a distraction. Simply, fake
news distracts people from real news.
Americans have a reputation for being ignorant, especially when it comes to politics and
worldly affairs. In 2013, the Kaiser Family Foundation conducted a series of surveys on the
United States role in Global Health. The surveys were then analyzed to provide insight on the
average Americans perception and knowledge regarding global health and the United States
governments role in Global Health. Generally, the surveys indicated a trend that Americans
based their answers off of false information and changed their answers given factual
information15. In one survey, people were asked if the United States was spending too much, too
little or just the right amount on foreign aid. Originally 61% of people claimed that the United
States was spending too much. After being told that one percent of the federal budget was spent
on foreign aid, only 30% still said that the United States was spending too much16. This indicates
that after being given correct information, half the people that originally thought the United
States was spending too much changed their minds.

This particular survey did not determine where everyone originally got their information
from; however in an additional survey conducted in January of last year, it was determined that 6
out of 10 Americans get their information from social media17. People do not attempt to search
for actual information or try to understand it themselves, because people initially see posts on
their social media feed. This often leads to people having false or misconstrued information18.
Since fake news is in abundance, it may also be difficult to determine what to trust. Often
credible sources may be difficult to read through and understand, especially when it comes to the
federal budget, which would have helped those in the Kaiser Family survey. Other sources that
try to put that information into simpler terms may add a bias to the information. In addition they
may present it in a manner that has been manipulated which thus causes citizens to be stuck with
misinformation19.

The biggest issue with citizens being misinformed about their countrys politics and
foreign affairs, is that when it comes time to vote on important topics, their decisions are based
off of false information. Consider the last election for instance. The campaigning between Hilary
Clinton and Donald Trump was met with an abundance of fake news stories including Pizzagate.
This may cause citizens to vote differently because they believed Clinton was a rapist or Trump
was a terrorist. The accusations sound almost ridiculous, however, it cannot be denied that many
of the decisions people make are based off of misinformation they see on social media. Would
the election outcome have been different if only factual, unbiased information were posted? This
cannot be determined for certain, however, it is speculated that certain voters would have made
other decisions had they been more informed on certain issues.

A Decline in Civic Discourse

One of the biggest issues fake news has created in society has been the hindrance of
communication. Because there are mass amounts of fake news and people cannot agree on facts,
citizens can no longer engage in effective civic discussions with each other. In order to engage
in an effective argument, it is often said that people must have a common ground in which they
can agree upon. As fake news is obviously misinformation that people choose to believe or not, a
common ground is eliminated as no one can agree upon basic facts. During the last election this
especially became a problem. As people were trying to debate/ defend the candidate they were
supporting, their arguments were invalid as most of the information they were using was based
off of fake news. Additionally, those who already held a certain belief over a respective
candidate were automatically inclined to agree with fake news stories written about their
opposition in order to validate their opinion. This leads to a cyclic affect in which opinions based
on false information are continuously validated through sources with no credibility consequently
preventing citizens from engaging in effective civic discourse.

RESOLVING THE FAKE NEWS DILEMMA

Currently there are a multitude of Libel and Slander laws that prevent people and
companies from being openly targeted by journalists, causing their reputation to be hindered.
Additionally, these laws are not meant to be overly restrictive in order allow for people,
especially journalists, to practice freedom of speech20. Currently the laws state that in order to
fall under a libel and slander case, a statement, in most instances, must be published, false,
injurious, and unprivileged21. A statement, could however, be spoken, pictured or even gestured.
The biggest issue courts encounter is determining if a statement is under the protection of the
first amendment. Generally, if a statement is one regarding an action made by a politician or
company which is false as opposed to a general statement made about their character, libel and
slander laws will apply22. Although general statements about character should be protected under
the first amendment, they should only apply to citizens posting on their own social media. This is
to say that websites such as Buzzfeed and Washingtonpost.com should be more restricted
regarding publishing false statements. Libel and slander laws should be revised in such a way
that all websites that are considered published sources, will not be permitted to post false
information or blatantly criticize an individual or company and have it be protected under first
amendment rights.
 Statements that are considered fair under libel and slander laws should still apply to
fake news sites. Fair statements are those that are still considered opinion but have reasonable
evidence to support their claim23. Minor errors such as misprinting someones age, which are not
considered to fall under a libel and slander case, should remain that way even with fake news
sites. If these small errors, however, are repeated in multiple instances and appear to be
motivated through malice, the issue should be taken to the court. Currently libel and slander laws
define a statement that is defamatory as one that is conducted with a malicious intent. This term
is ambiguous, however, and leaves the courts once again questioning first amendment rights. To
prevent the issue of the courts deciding, libel and slander laws should define malicious intents as
statement, which use excessively strong and bias language repeatedly. That is to say, claiming a
politician is a rapist without concrete evidence should not be protected under the first
amendment.
Finally, smaller websites that are created based on false information, such as
pizzagate.com, should be taken down. These sites only serve to ignite fear and hatred and should
therefore be removed as to prevent further issues such as that caused by the shooter entering
Comet Ping Pong Pizzeria. In order to prevent future instances like these, consequences for
posting such articles should have more stringent punishments. As of now, most libel and slander
cases are presented in the form of a lawsuit, which is taken to the court. The result of most of
these cases is the offender owing money to the plaintiff as well as a retraction of their statement.
In situations where false statements ignite violence, offenders should serve jail time. It will still
be the courts decision as to the legitimacy of a statement igniting something as severe as a
shooting, however, if the court determines a violent action was definitely stimulated from an
unreasonably false statement, then the offender should face jail charges. Even though this
measure is seemingly after-the-fact, it is preventative in the sense that people will be more
conscientious of what they are posting as to avoid facing criminal charges.

CONCLUSION
Fake news is abundant in society and is hindering citizens from engaging effectively with
each other and with the world around them. Due to the abundance of fake news, multiple issues
have arisen in society, such as an increase in hatred and violence as well as general decrease in
worldly knowledge. Although courts are trying to better distinguish fake news from statements
protected under 1st amendment rights, libel and slander should become more stringent to prevent
discrepancies in the court. Small websites, which typically harbor fake news, should be
prevented from posting obviously biased statements. Additionally, websites that are entirely
created off of false statements should be dismantled. Finally, individuals who publish statements
that ignite violence should face jail time to prevent similar cases.
 ENDNOTES
1. Halpern, Jake. "The Man Who Shot Michael Brown." The New Yorker. August 03, 2015.
Accessed April 19, 2017. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/08/10/the-cop.
2. Posted at 9:14 am on March 13, 2017 by Bob Owens. "This "New Video" Of Mike
Brown Is The Very Definition of "Fake News"." Bearing Arms. March 13, 2017.
Accessed April 19, 2017. https://bearingarms.com/bob-o/2017/03/13/mike-browns-death-
fake-news/.
3. Ibid
4. Ibid
5. Staff, NPR. "What Legal Recourse Do Victims Of Fake News Stories Have?" NPR.
December 07, 2016. Accessed April 19, 2017.
http://www.npr.org/2016/12/07/504723649/what-legal-recourse-do-victims-of-fake-
news-stories-have.
6. Page, Clarence. "Does the First Amendment protect fake news?" Chicagotribune.com.
December 06, 2016. Accessed April 19, 2017.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/page/ct-pizzagate-fake-news-first-
amendment-perspec-1207-20161206-story.html.
7. Ibid
8. "Defamation Law - Guide to Libel and Slander Law." Legal Sources . 2017. Accessed
April 19, 2017. https://www.hg.org/defamation.html.
9. Ibid
10. Goldman, Cecilia Kang and Adam. "In Washington Pizzeria Attack, Fake News Brought
Real Guns." The New York Times. December 05, 2016. Accessed April 19, 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/business/media/comet-ping-pong-pizza-shooting-
fake-news-consequences.html.
11. Ibid
12. Ibid
13. Ibid
14. "Defamation Law - Guide to Libel and Slander Law." Legal Sources . 2017. Accessed
April 19, 2017. https://www.hg.org/defamation.html.
 15. 07, 2013 Nov. "2013 Survey of Americans on the U.S. Role in Global Health." The
Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. September 03, 2014. Accessed April 19, 2017.
http://kff.org/global-health-policy/poll-finding/2013-survey-of-americans-on-the-u-s-
role-in-global-health/.
16. Ibid
17. Lichterman, Joseph. "Nearly half of U.S. adults get news on Facebook, Pew says."
Nieman Lab. May 26, 2016. Accessed April 19, 2017.
http://www.niemanlab.org/2016/05/pew-report-44-percent-of-u-s-adults-get-news-on-
facebook/.
18. Ibid
19. Hunter, Derek. "Derek Hunter - The Real Problem With Fake News." Townhall. January
08, 2017. Accessed April 19, 2017.
https://townhall.com/columnists/derekhunter/2017/01/08/the-real-problem-with-fake-
news-n2268346.
20. Doskow, Attorney Emily. "Defamation Law Made Simple." Www.nolo.com. 2017.
Accessed April 19, 2017. http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/defamation-law-
made-simple-29718.html.
21. Ibid
22. Ibid
23. "Defamation Law - Guide to Libel and Slander Law." Legal Sources . 2017. Accessed
April 19, 2017. https://www.hg.org/defamation.html.

*info graphics were taken from websites corresponding to citations 15 and 19.