Introduction
In the digital age, social media has become a pivotal platform for journalism, revolutionizing the dissemination and consumption of media on a global context. The traditional roles of journalists are being re-imagined as social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram have removed the boundaries to allow ordinary citizens to broadcast real-time updates and engage with a global audience directly. This participatory form of journalism has empowered individuals to reshape mainstream narratives, thus, democratizing the flow of information. However, this shift also imposes challenges to ensure the integrity of the information being shared. The viral nature of social media, which facilitates the rapid spread of information, often outpaces the corrective measures that could be enforced to maintain journalistic standards.
Social media plays a dual role; it is a powerful tool to sustain democratic engagement and it is a potential tool for misinformation. This dynamic is explored in this paper. The thesis of this paper asserts that although social media can perpetuate misinformation, it fundamentally empowers individuals, particularly during crises such as the conflict in Gaza, enabling them to act as citizen journalists and thus democratizing journalism at an unprecedented scale. This investigation shows the transformative impact of social media on journalism while highlighting the need for innovation to mitigate its potential drawbacks.
Social Media as a Tool for Journalism
Social media has fundamentally transformed traditional journalism by reframing how information is disseminated and consumed. Jürgen Habermas’ Public Sphere Theory offers a framework for examining these changes, particularly hoe public discourse is conducted in the modern age. According to Habermas’ concept, the public sphere is a place where people can freely exchange ideas and opinions without interference from the state or private industry (Habermas, 1962). Social media platforms embody this concept by enabling people globally to share news and opinions in real time, thus democratizing information flow and empowering independent journalism.
This shift, often referred to as the social media revolution, emphasizes key journalistic principles such as transparency and public engagement, effectively giving a platform to those in the audience seat (Harper, 2010). Now, news and updates available on social media have outpaced what is capable on mainstream media news channels. Platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram not only enable journalists to gather information directly from sources and eyewitnesses but also provide real-time updates during unfolding events, thus enhancing the immediacy and relevance of news reporting.
However, the rapid dissemination of information presents significant challenges. The accessibility of social media allows millions of users to publish information daily without the rigorous fact-checking standards of professional journalism, leading to issues with information accuracy and the spread of “fake news” (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017). As such, a critical re-evaluation of journalistic practices is needed to uphold the accuracy and integrity of information in a fast-paced digital landscape.
History of Citizen Journalism
The increasing influence and relevance of citizen journalism can be traced back to the early 2000s when social media and technology became increasingly available globally. This shift is evidenced by statistics from the early 2000s, which show that over 7% of American Internet users had created blogs. The readership of these blogs was estimated at 27% of the Internet-using population, a substantial proportion of whom were younger people (Epstein & Reich, 2009). The September 11 attacks in America saw a significant increase in political discourse on social media platforms, signaling the first shift towards a new form of journalism.
This period saw the decline of the traditional top-down news model as digital platforms, especially blogs, empowered audiences to create and share news. This shift towards participatory journalism has democratized information dissemination, allowing not just trained journalists but anyone with internet access to report on events and express opinions (Gillmor, 2006).
Unlike traditional media which often focuses on conflict and sensationalism, citizen journalism can offer perspectives focused on reconciliation and solutions, aiming to provide a more balanced view of events by providing coverage that emphasizes empathy, transparency, and humanization of all parties involved in conflicts. This is significant in shaping public perception and potentially influencing peaceful outcomes to conflicts.
Social Media and Misinformation
Misinformation, defined as the dissemination of false information without the intent to deceive, contrasts with disinformation, which is spread with the intention to mislead (Lazer et al., 2019). The impacts of misinformation are substantial, affecting public trust in media, influencing policy decisions, and widening social divisions. Misinformation in social media, facilitated by its viral nature and wide reach, exacerbates these threats due to its speed and reach. The viral nature of social media often outpaces any corrective measures later implemented, leaving a gap in technology to ensure accuracy while protecting freedom of speech.
Social media platforms have facilitated various misinformation campaigns, where the lack of regulation of speech was exploited to serve various social and political interests. One notable example involved misinformation during the 2019 Indian elections, where visual misinformation on WhatsApp influenced public opinion and electoral outcomes (Garimella & Eckles, 2020). Another case was the spread of COVID-19 misinformation through visuals, which significantly impacted public health responses and exacerbated panic and misinformation (Brennen et al., 2020).
The causes of misinformation in social media are complex, including algorithmic amplification, which prioritizes engagement over accuracy, and cognitive biases that make sensational and emotionally charged content more appealing. These dynamics not only pose a psychological threat but also exacerbate political, religious, and cultural rifts by fostering echo chambers that amplify preexisting biases and isolate individuals from opposing viewpoint. The spread of misinformation can undermine trust in institutions and erode social cohesion poses significant challenges to effective public discourse and informed decision making within democracies.
Stricter regulatory frameworks for social media platforms, improved digital literacy programs to improve critical engagement with media, and innovative technological approaches that prioritize integrity in algorithmic content curation are just a few of the multifaceted strategies that must be developed and put into action to counter these trends.
Issues with the mainstream western media
In today’s rapidly evolving media landscape, it is increasingly difficult to ensure the accuracy of the news we are presented with on our social media. However, the biases of news presenters are equally difficult to detect. Mainstream media outlets, traditionally trusted sources of information, are not exempt from skewed reporting that leads to misrepresentations similar to those found on newer digital platforms. The heavy influence of bias in methodically shaping news coverage was exposed by a leaked memo from The New York Times, as reported by The Intercept.
The article from The Intercept concerning the New York Times’ internal memo encourages journalists to use strong, emotive, and accusational language when reporting on Palestinian aggression while avoiding such language when describing Israeli aggressions. It demonstrates how even reputable news outlets can impose restrictions that align with specific narratives, which in this case, appears to favor Israeli perspectives. Journalists from the NYT are directed to avoid terms like “genocide,” “ethnic cleansing,” and “occupied territory,” and the discouragement from using the word “Palestine” except under exceptional circumstances, reflects a clear editorial stance that can shape public perception by omitting or softening certain aspects of the conflict. This kind of language control is similar to the challenges posed by misinformation on social media, where biased or selective presentation or being in an echo-chamber can distort the truth.
The memo’s guidance to describe the violent actions against Israelis with terms like “terrorism,” while avoiding equally strong language for actions against Palestinians, demonstrates a double standard in terminology that can mislead readers about the nature and scale of the conflict. Both platforms—mainstream and social media—share vulnerabilities to biased reporting which manifest through different mechanisms. In mainstream media, it often stems from editorial decisions influenced by political or commercial pressures, whereas in social media, it frequently arises from unverified user-generated content and algorithmic amplification. These issues highlight the broader challenge of achieving objective and balanced reporting, serving as a warning to social media users and viewers of traditional media to critically assess news sources before forming their views.
Citizen Journalism Case Study: Gaza Conflict
The 2014 Gaza War, known as Operation Protective Edge, marked a significant turning point in the use of social media for conflict reporting. This period is significant is demonstrating the impact of social media and citizen journalism in re-shaping mainstream narratives for a global audience (Alakklouk & Gülnar, 2023).
During the 2014 conflict, Israel and Gaza experienced intense military engagements, the reporting of the conflict created huge controversy amongst the Arab population and particularly Palestinians who felt misrepresented (Al-Helou, 2014). In response citizen journalists in Gaza utilized social media platforms extensively to document the Israeli military operations and their impact on the civilian population. Platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube became conduits for the rapid dissemination of information, enabling Palestinians to frame their narrative of the conflict and engage with an international audience directly (Alakklouk & Gülnar, 2023). This grassroots media movement was crucial in countering mainstream media narratives, often perceived as skewed towards the Israeli perspective.
Citizen Journalism is crucial in conflicts in areas like Gaza that are blockaded and access to free press is extremely limited specially in periods of escalation. The immediacy and accessibility of social media allowed Palestinian citizen journalists to provide real-time updates and firsthand accounts of the war. This immediate dissemination of information not only increased the visibility of these underreported events but also added a layer of pressure on traditional media to deepen their investigations and broaden their coverage to maintain credibility and audience trust.
The widespread use of mobile phones and the Internet enabled Gazans to share images, video footage or testimonials almost instantly, challenging traditional news cycles and editorial control by mainstream media. The journalism done by citizens elevated the conflict from sensationalized fighting over land by giving a face to the civilians caught amongst the politics and shining a light to the human suffering caused by war. As a result, the narrative on the Gaza conflict and other events has become more comprehensive with an increased focus on humanitarian aspects that are crucial to understanding the full impact of such conflicts; Duru & Duru, 2009 This shift highlights the vital role played by citizen journalism in democratizing information and changing how stories are presented in a contemporary media landscape.
Challenges With Democratized Journalism
Verifying the information provided by non-professional journalists is one of the main issues facing democratized journalism. In contrast to traditional journalism, which involves careful editing of stories, social media allows content to be shared instantly without the same level of scrutiny. This instantaneity might cause false or misleading information to proliferate quickly. When sources are anonymous or material comes from areas where there are ongoing wars or government limitations that make independent verification difficult, it becomes very difficult to ensure the accuracy of reporting.
A number of key tactics are required to overcome these issues and moral dilemmas while maintaining the advantages of democratized reporting. In order to provide consumers and content creators with the abilities to properly evaluate and authenticate information, it is first imperative to improve digital literacy education. Moving forward, it is essential for media stakeholders—journalists, educators, policymakers, and technology developers—to collaboratively develop strategies that address these challenges. Furthermore, social media companies need to improve their fact-checking and algorithmic processes in order to more effectively identify, categorize, and filter false information. This needs to be done ina way that does not impact the freedom of speech of users, it is imperative to incentives social media platforms against associating with politicians or private entities so they do not sway language control on social media platforms to fit a particular narrative.
Conclusion:
This paper has explored the profound influence of social media on journalism, revealing both its empowering effects and its complex challenges. Social media platforms have democratized the flow of information, enabling citizens worldwide to become frontline reporters and actively shape public discourse, particularly during critical events such as the Gaza conflict. However, this democratization has resulted in increased misinformation, which threatens the integrity of journalism and public trust. As this paper has demonstrated, tackling these challenges requires a multifaceted approach including enhancing digital literacy, refining technological filters, and promoting ethical standards among citizen journalists. Future efforts must focus on maintaining the balance between leveraging the participatory benefits of social media and safeguarding against its potential to misinform, ensuring that it continues to serve as a pillar for democratic engagement rather than a disruptive force.
References:
- Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. *Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31*(2), 211-236.
- Harper, J. (2010). The social media revolution: Exploring the impact on journalism and news media organizations. *Inquiries Journal, 2*(3), 1-5.
- Epstein, R., & Reich, R. (Eds.). (2009). *Parsing the Turing Test: Philosophical and methodological issues in the quest for the thinking computer*. Springer.
- Bowman, S., & Willis, C. (2003). *We media: How audiences are shaping the future of news and information*. The Media Center at the American Press Institute.
- Gillmor, D. (2006). *We the media: Grassroots journalism by the people, for the people*. O’Reilly Media.
- Lazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., Metzger, M. J., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., Schudson, M., Sloman, S. A., Sunstein, C. R., Thorson, E. A., Watts, D. J., & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. *Science, 359*(6380), 1094-1096.
- Garimella, V. R. K., & Eckles, D. (2020). Images and misinformation in political groups: Evidence from WhatsApp in India. *American Political Science Review, 114*(3), 982-992.
- Brennen, J. S., Simon, F., Howard, P. N., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). Types, sources, and claims of COVID-19 misinformation. *Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism*.
- Duru, A., & Duru, N. (2009). Media, democracy and globalization. In Media and democracy (pp. 57-68). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
- Alakklouk, B., & Gülnar, S. (2023). Social media and citizen journalism: Voice of the marginalized. *Media Studies Journal, 37*(1), 45-59.
- Al-Helou, D. (2014). The role of social media in the ‘Syrian uprising’. *Journal of Media Studies, 29*(2), 31-50.
- Peters, B., & Witschge, T. (2015). From grand narratives of democracy to small expectations of participation. *Journalism Practice, 9*(1), 19-34.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.