A short thread on one aspect of the @Peston and @BBClauraK (and others) contribution to the ‘fake news’ machine coming out of Number 10, in the context of @Peston’s response to @OborneTweets piece....
One of the defences offered is that we shouldn’t look at individual tweets out of context, or think of them as being ‘uncritical’ repeating of the misinformation or spin from Cummings or whoever it might be.
This defence misses the ‘fake news’ issue fundamentally. The point is that fake news spreaders *do* use tweets out of context to magnify their narratives and support their agendas.
So we *have* to look at tweets individually as well as in context - because that’s how they’re going to be used by those wishing to misinform. Both @Peston and @BBClauraK should know this. I hope they do, because if not they’re letting themselves be used.
This provides a challenge for journalists - not just @Peston and @bbclaurak - in that they need to find a way to put their caveats, their qualifications, their analysis, into the same tweet as they’re repetition of the story being put out by the spinners.
A direct way can be to *not* say ‘No 10 source’ when they really mean Cummings. That provides context, and immediately alerts the reader to the spin, without having to work hard on analysis right away.
Another way is to add a little bit of context into the tweet - just a few words to ensure that there’s doubt as to the authenticity or reliability of the source... ‘but they’ve said that before, and it hasn’t proven true’ or words to that effect.
Otherwise, though neither @Peston nor @BBClauraK may intend it (which is another question) they *will* be contributing to the misinformation, and *will* be part of the spin regime rather that being the helpful and informative journalists they can and should be. /end
