For weeks media outlets from all over the world have been talking almost exclusively about the COVID-19 pandemic, and it could not be otherwise seeing how bad the situation is all in the five continents. The COVID-19 epidemic is the second global event of the internet era after 9/11; in the past there had been others, such as the explosion of the Chernobyl power plant or the Apollo 11 Moon landing, but the internet did not exist back then and information was distributed via television or newspapers.
September 11 was the first event in history to have a united and organized movement of conspiracy theorists on a global scale, which was opposed for the first time by an equally global and equally organized debunker movement to which I also belong, being a member of Undicisettembre since its foundation in 2006. In Italy mainstream information has often created confusion on this topic, it would be enough to mention Confronting the Evidence broadcast by Report on Italian state owned TV channel Rai 3 (which is the reason why I have never watched Report since then) or the television space given by talk show Matrix, at the time anchored by the very famous Enrico Mentana who today poses (fortunately!) as the defender of fact checking against any conspiracy theory, to Massimo Mazzucco and Giulietto Chiesa in 2007. However, on this issue there have always been only two well distinguished currents of thought: conspiracy theorists (who, let's not forget, tell lies trying to explain the collapses using the physics of the rigid masses that you learn in sixth grade) and supporters of a commonly accepted and verified version.
On the other hand, the COVID-19 epidemic is creating such a mess in the world of information that it is second only to the one in hospitals. We are bombed with information among which it is very difficult to navigate. The recent telematic disputes between well known Italian science popularizers Salvo Di Grazia and Roberto Burioni on the numbers of new infections in China and the one between Burioni himself and Dr. Gismondo on the severity of the disease have shown how even experts can have conflicting opinions; yet until now "opinion of experts" was the only weapon to distinguish the truth from the lies of the conspiracy theorists. China and Russia spread the same conspiracy theories that professional conspiracy theorists spread through mainstream channels or through the voices of their ministers: those according to which the virus was created in the US and spread to China to damage its economy. It would be interesting to know from conspiracy theorists how their theory fits in with the fact that the US itself will suffer enormous damage from the virus, but in the meantime what are the media doing to shed light on these aspects?
Instead of explaining that the Defender Europe 2020 military exercise was planned months ago and has nothing to do with COVID-19, some newspapers spread theories according to which it would be an attempt by the American government to invade Europe.
In the United Kingdom the government’s chief science adviser spoke of herd immunity, as if he did not want to take countermeasures against the virus, and Dr. Christopher Jessen, who is a television personality but he's also nevertheless a doctor, says that Italians use the virus as an excuse not to work. But can we put these people on the same level as our local Roberto Burioni? Why don't the media help us understand?
Every day some newspapers claim they are finally clarifying how masks should be used: which ones are needed and who needs them. And every time a different opinion is invariably given. One day there is discussion on a Russian drug effective against coronavirus, the next day there is one in Japan that has the same effect. Italian newspaper La Repubblica throws mud on a Brescia-based company that would have secretly sold its swabs to the USA when they are scarce in Italy; the same company clarifies that in Italy there is no shortage of swabs and that the number of those sent to the USA is minimum, and threatens legal action against the newspaper that reported this falsehood. And again: is China the culprit of this situation or the savior of the world who spreads its know-how? Russia threatens its doctors not to reveal the truth? How is it possible that in North Korea there is not even a case and that numbers in Russia are so low? Did US intelligence warn Trump in January? Why didn't the president do anything? And why don't the media clarify all this?
It is very difficult to find one's way in this myriad of information, because some of the news are true and others are false. White or black. In reconstruction of facts there's no grey. What do we do then? What is the solution?
For information professionals the recommendation is always the same: check the sources, hear more than one and never report second-hand information.
For consumers it is a real hodgepodge. The only good strategy is caution: never take information for good if you do not see it reported by multiple sources, who consult different experts independently. However, this solution is far from optimal. For example, imagine that I knew nothing of the murder of John Fitzgerald Kennedy and asked an opinion from a friend who knows the subject; he would explain me that Lee Harvey Oswald is the only murderer and that he acted alone. By adopting the strategy of caution I would end up not accepting correct information, suspending it and putting it in the freezer waiting on further investigations; thus wasting an opportunity to receive good information quickly.
Unfortunately, in this chaos there is no quick and easy solution. Indeed, perhaps there is no solution at all. Yet even fake news are a virus to be eradicated and for which a vaccine would be needed.
September 11 was the first event in history to have a united and organized movement of conspiracy theorists on a global scale, which was opposed for the first time by an equally global and equally organized debunker movement to which I also belong, being a member of Undicisettembre since its foundation in 2006. In Italy mainstream information has often created confusion on this topic, it would be enough to mention Confronting the Evidence broadcast by Report on Italian state owned TV channel Rai 3 (which is the reason why I have never watched Report since then) or the television space given by talk show Matrix, at the time anchored by the very famous Enrico Mentana who today poses (fortunately!) as the defender of fact checking against any conspiracy theory, to Massimo Mazzucco and Giulietto Chiesa in 2007. However, on this issue there have always been only two well distinguished currents of thought: conspiracy theorists (who, let's not forget, tell lies trying to explain the collapses using the physics of the rigid masses that you learn in sixth grade) and supporters of a commonly accepted and verified version.
On the other hand, the COVID-19 epidemic is creating such a mess in the world of information that it is second only to the one in hospitals. We are bombed with information among which it is very difficult to navigate. The recent telematic disputes between well known Italian science popularizers Salvo Di Grazia and Roberto Burioni on the numbers of new infections in China and the one between Burioni himself and Dr. Gismondo on the severity of the disease have shown how even experts can have conflicting opinions; yet until now "opinion of experts" was the only weapon to distinguish the truth from the lies of the conspiracy theorists. China and Russia spread the same conspiracy theories that professional conspiracy theorists spread through mainstream channels or through the voices of their ministers: those according to which the virus was created in the US and spread to China to damage its economy. It would be interesting to know from conspiracy theorists how their theory fits in with the fact that the US itself will suffer enormous damage from the virus, but in the meantime what are the media doing to shed light on these aspects?
Instead of explaining that the Defender Europe 2020 military exercise was planned months ago and has nothing to do with COVID-19, some newspapers spread theories according to which it would be an attempt by the American government to invade Europe.
In the United Kingdom the government’s chief science adviser spoke of herd immunity, as if he did not want to take countermeasures against the virus, and Dr. Christopher Jessen, who is a television personality but he's also nevertheless a doctor, says that Italians use the virus as an excuse not to work. But can we put these people on the same level as our local Roberto Burioni? Why don't the media help us understand?
Every day some newspapers claim they are finally clarifying how masks should be used: which ones are needed and who needs them. And every time a different opinion is invariably given. One day there is discussion on a Russian drug effective against coronavirus, the next day there is one in Japan that has the same effect. Italian newspaper La Repubblica throws mud on a Brescia-based company that would have secretly sold its swabs to the USA when they are scarce in Italy; the same company clarifies that in Italy there is no shortage of swabs and that the number of those sent to the USA is minimum, and threatens legal action against the newspaper that reported this falsehood. And again: is China the culprit of this situation or the savior of the world who spreads its know-how? Russia threatens its doctors not to reveal the truth? How is it possible that in North Korea there is not even a case and that numbers in Russia are so low? Did US intelligence warn Trump in January? Why didn't the president do anything? And why don't the media clarify all this?
It is very difficult to find one's way in this myriad of information, because some of the news are true and others are false. White or black. In reconstruction of facts there's no grey. What do we do then? What is the solution?
For information professionals the recommendation is always the same: check the sources, hear more than one and never report second-hand information.
For consumers it is a real hodgepodge. The only good strategy is caution: never take information for good if you do not see it reported by multiple sources, who consult different experts independently. However, this solution is far from optimal. For example, imagine that I knew nothing of the murder of John Fitzgerald Kennedy and asked an opinion from a friend who knows the subject; he would explain me that Lee Harvey Oswald is the only murderer and that he acted alone. By adopting the strategy of caution I would end up not accepting correct information, suspending it and putting it in the freezer waiting on further investigations; thus wasting an opportunity to receive good information quickly.
Unfortunately, in this chaos there is no quick and easy solution. Indeed, perhaps there is no solution at all. Yet even fake news are a virus to be eradicated and for which a vaccine would be needed.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento