I recently encountered an article aimed at journalists by Mollie Muchna, Trusting News project manager. Her experience mirrored mine so I’ve shamelessly shared her outline and suggestions today.
A friend of mine who rarely tunes in to the news shared unfounded theories about the Artemis II mission around the Moon: “You know that’s all done on a movie set. And the Moon landings were faked the same way too.”
Naturally, my first instinct was to fact-check them. But as I went to collect links, I actually had a really difficult time finding any news source of record outright explaining that this was one of many unfounded theories that have been spreading for years, much less any information about where the rumor originated from and why it was spreading.
It took me more than 30 minutes of Googling and piecing together bits of information from different podcasts and news sources to compile what I felt like was a compelling fact-check.
The experience left me wishing more journalists were covering misinformation like this head-on in their local communities. The average person likely isn’t fact-checking information at all, much less going to great lengths to do so. Where does that leave people who are perhaps just misguided or confused about what’s true?
Journalists are rightfully wary of covering misinformation for fear of repeating and platforming false information. But with 70% of Americans seeing misinformation as a major threat, our role as journalists must not be just sharing facts but being sense makers for our communities.
See Willem Lange’s column this week for a brief mention of his having the same problem.
Sometimes, addressing misinformation can be as simple as pointing people to a fact-check on a site like PolitiFact or Snopes. But information from our own team, about issues in our own community, are important as well.
As false information has grown with the advent of social media, the monetization of which exacerbates it, our mission has grown to include bringing you accurate information to help you make decisions for you and your family. We’re committed to showing you the facts and we’ll aim to bring you along for the process of how we find out what’s true.
Locally, we find a common way misinformation begins, is with a question. That might be something like, “Has the school board considered subject X?” That might then be shared by someone else on social media as, “The school board hasn’t considered subject X.”
Sometimes it exhibits as, “The town didn’t add issue Y to the meeting warning.” The subject may not have come up while the warning was being developed, thus it may be correct, but inaccurate by suggesting negligence.
Recent questions locally about consolidation and closure of Woodbury Elementary School have included examples of both inaccuracies. It’s a complicated subject because the Mountain View Union Elementary School District (MVU) board, thus all school district voters, are responsible for budgets, but the town where the school is located must vote to approve a school’s closure.
Suggesting that the budget reflect closure without a vote of the town isn’t enough to close a school. It would seem imprudent to propose a budget dependent upon closure of a school, when it’s not possible without a subsequent affirmative vote.
What’s happening now in the MVU district seems to be holding the district’s FY27 budget hostage over something that it will not change.
While it’s easy to say the board has not considered the issue, it seems more appropriate to say they have not thoroughly considered it, which seems to be the case given the recent formation of a subcommittee to study the issue and before that the suggestion that a consultant be hired to help evaluate financial impacts of closing schools.
In Greensboro, moving fifth and sixth graders to other schools was budgeted for, as was subsequently moving others to leave only Pre-K students, but that town has never been asked to close Lakeview school there.
There are times when we will not cover misinformation.
We’ve shared this list from First Draft before in Trust Tips, but it’s a good one when deciding when to address misinformation, or when discussing it might bring more unwarranted attention to unverified claims.
We ask ourselves, How much engagement has the rumor received, and how does that compare to similar issues we’ve covered?
Is the discussion around the rumor limited to one community online?
Has the rumor jumped platforms?
Did an influencer or verified account share the rumor?
Have large media outlets covered the rumor?
When seeing information from unknown or unchecked sources, you can ask yourself, Are they citing sources?
Are they corroborating information from multiple credible sources?
Are they publicly correcting mistakes?
Are they clear about their funding and how they make money?
Is it clear their goal is to inform?
It’s not always possible for us or you to be certain any particular statement is true or false, in which case we should all be careful not to share it.
Paul Fixx, editor
