In today’s world, people can attain information in many ways. Long gone are the days where the only methods of attaining information. on on current events were the television, radio and newspapers. Today, the internet has opened up a whole new world of information sharing. As a result, social media and the internet have changed the way we gather, share, and interpret news and information.
The rate at which information can be shared and the amount of people that can see this information is exponentially greater than ever before. When people search for news and information, they want to get this from a source they know is truthful. Fake news is abundant in today’s media landscape, and if one is not diligent enough, they could fall victim to it. While it remains an ever evolving term, fake news can be described as “falsified news stories in the election campaign, to “information reported in a news outlet that is bogus””. (Brummette, et al., 2018). People want to get their information from a source they can trust. Sometimes, this may mean that the source they trust plays to their inherent biases. People may gravitate towards information and news that suits their beliefs, and search for news that solely falls in line with their beliefs. A person’s level of connection to their personal social network and community may play a part in how they interpret news and information. Having trust in the information that you attain is a key factor in the spread of fake news, and is defined through the processes of selective exposure and confirmation bias.
In today’s news media world, people can access information very easily. The internet has provided people the ability to search for information on any topic they choose. This ability, however, has created a phenomenon called ‘selective exposure’. There are people want to expose themselves to news and information that they can agree with. Selective exposure can occur when a person deliberately searches for information that they only agree with, not disagree with. “ Selective exposure to social media content, as described by Himelboim et al. (2013), occurs when individuals actively seek content that is cognitively congruent with their preferences and prior beliefs.” (Aruguete & Calvo, 2018). This poses a problem for users when searching for content and information online as they are likely to expose themselves to a heavily biased amount of information.
This information is not likely to be objective or balanced as it only falls in line with one belief system, or one side of an issue, that being the side the user agrees with. Selective exposure can be especially prevalent in the realm of social media. Users belonging to sites like Facebook or Twitter can follow other people and media entities that reinforce what they already believe to be true, rather than seek out the objective truth in a matter: “ By connecting with like-minded peers and ideologically aligned media, users are exposed to a disproportionate number of publications that validate their own assumptions.” (Aruguete & Calvo, 2018). In 2016, anti-government activists descended upon the largest and richest cities in Argentina, in protest of an issue called “the great rate hike”. With the mainstream news media framing the protests in very different opposing lights (depending on the outlet), many took to social media to spread the word about the protests, dubbed “The #Tarifazo Protests”.
Online, word of these protests spread across Facebook and Twitter like wildfire. Both anti-government protesters and supporters of the government spread information and ideas online. What this study found after looking into the analytics of what was shared and by which side, it was concluded that “…pro-government and opposition users in Argentina coalesced into two well-defined communities that exchanged information almost exclusively with like-minded users.” (Aruguete & Calvo, 2018). This shows how when a group of people all agree on a topic, they can band together to share information that is consistent with the topic on which they agree on, selectively sharing content that is consistent with their beliefs. This can be problematic as it does not provide a balanced or truthful view of the issue they are discussing online. It is only one side of the issue that they are discussing, yet they trust the information that they are sharing and in turn being exposed to, as it falls in line with what they believe to be true. This process of selective exposure can also be defined through the lens of the political sphere.
In an online experiment conducted by Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick, participants were exposed to a questionnaire that measured how they felt about 4 certain political issues. Several days later the same group was asked to engage in a activity that was based on selective exposure, where they were asked to go through articles that covered all four of the political issues. The procedure went as follows: “A Microsoft Silverlight application administered the study entirely online and displayed search results and questionnaire items. It also recorded browsing activity and response latency to attitude accessibility items.” (Knobloch-Westerwick, et al., 2015). After the experiment was conducted, the results yielded a positive results that supported the validity of selective exposure in individuals searching for information on political issues: “…a more natural online search setting during a real election campaign in the present study found a strong bias in selective exposure toward attitude consistent online search results.” (Knobloch-Westerwick, et. al, 2015).
This study is a good example of how some people naturally seek out information that is consistent with their own beliefs. This may not be conducive to having a fact-based, unbiased opinion on things, but it seems that some people are more comfortable with looking for news that reaffirms what they believe to be fact. This should be kept in mind when considering how people navigate the world of fake news in today’s current political climate – trust in what you believe may influence you to seek out news that reinforces those beliefs: “…the present results suggest that consumers of political information do not always engage in motivated reasoning.” (Knobloch-Westerwick, et al., 2015). In addition to selective exposure, people may not just seek information that falls in line with their own beliefs, but they can also interpret and accept news in ways that favor their own beliefs.
Confirmation Bias is another process in which trust in information and the spread of fake news can be defined. This is a process where people only accept what they believe to be true, or want to believe to be true: “…encountering information that challenges an individual’s views instigates discomfort…such cognitive dissonance and associated discomfort motivates individuals to avoid attitude challenging messages (confirmation bias).” (Knobloch-Westerwick, et al., 2015). In an Ohio State University study conducted by the author of several of the articles referenced in this review, Silvia Knobloch-Westerwick, it was found that students, when given five minutes to read articles online covering certain issues, students chose and read articles that agreed with their own views: “…participants spent 36 percent more time reading articles that agreed with their point of view.
They had a 58 percent chance of choosing articles that supported their views, as opposed to a 43 percent chance of choosing an article that challenged their view.” (Hsu, 2009). This shows how people may only accept what they deem credible, and will only consume information that supports this. Knobloch-Westerwick later went on to conduct an experiment that would test confirmation bias in German citizens prior to the 2014 federal elections in Germany. The test procedure was intentionally set-up to closely mirror the testing methods used in the article referenced earlier on selective exposure (Knobloch-Westerwick et al., 2015), i.e. an online experiment. Participants were essentially monitored on how they synthesized information in articles given to them online.
The study found that a confirmation bias governed the participants to use the process of selective exposure to find information consistent with that they believe: “The results demonstrate that selective exposure was governed by a confirmation bias such that attitude-consistent information from an online search was preferred.” (Knobloch-Westerwick, et al., 2015).The results lended and supported evidence from the previous article: “The present work complements the solid evidence on a confirmation bias in selective exposure to political information that exists for the American context.” (Knobloch-Westerwick, et al., 2015). These findings also suggest that the processes of selective exposure and confirmation bias, while different processes, can work in tandem when a person wants to expose themselves to information that is strictly consistent with what they believe to be true. Given that these processes would expose people to non-objective, biased information, this suggests that someone who engages in the practices of both processes may be more susceptible in exposing themselves to fake news and spreading it as well.
Another process that could suggest that a person may be more susceptible to consuming fake news and spreading it is social capital. “Social capital can be broadly defined as the value derived from resources embedded in social ties with others (Lin, 2008).” (Zuniga, et al., 2017). Social capital can be measured as one’s connection to their community, friends and family in real-life and online. If one has a high level of social capital, this would mean that they have a strong connection to family, friends and their community in their lives and their online presence as well. Young people, especially teens with high levels of social capital may have the potential to be exposed to a high volume of information (and potentially fake news): “ “My friends post links to articles and videos and I learn about things that way.” And Phola…checked Facebook and Youtube ‘at least five times per day.’” (Marchi, 2012). While there is not sufficient evidence to support the notion that possessing a high level of social capital can potentially lead to the exposure of fake news, it may be worth looking into.
Having assessed several scholarly articles and conducted diligent research, it can be surmised that the processes of selective exposure and confirmation bias play a pivotal role in how some people find trust in the information they attain. If one wants to expose themselves to information that falls in line with their beliefs, they may use the process of selective exposure to only unearth information that supports what they believe to be true. Some may assess information in an article they read and find that it is not consistent with their beliefs, so, in the true fashion of confirmation bias, they refute it as misleading drivel.
These processes are integral to the spread and prosperity of fake news. People who fall victim to fake news or subscribe to one-dimensional views that are not entirely true may be inclined to spread these views, or seek out more information that supports these views. This in turn feeds the beast that is fake news as the more clicks and attention that non-factual information gets, the more it thrives as the demand of this fake news rises. As further research is bound to be conducted, more attention should be paid to the possible connection between social capital and information exposure. It seems that there could be more to the notion that high levels of social capital could be related to fake news exposure. All things considered, trust is the key factor in the processes of selective exposure and confirmation bias. People want to trust the news they consume, and some want to only trust the news that agrees with them. Having trust in the news you attain is a key factor in the spread of fake news, and can be defined through the processes of selective exposure and confirmation bias.
