To what extent do the media reflect reality? Is there a good way to sift through the information we are confronted with every day? Guido Keel addressed these questions as part of our series of events entitled ‘Trump, Xi Jinping and your job’. He offers some key insights into how to assess global news objectively.
Have the Swiss lost faith in the media?
In our country, a recent survey found that only 46 per cent of adults trust information from the mainstream media. 39 per cent say they avoid the news to preserve their mental health, or because they are exhausted by the constant stream of information they have to sift through. Furthermore, 46 per cent rarely consult the media or get their news via social media. This situation is not without consequences: a more detached relationship with information can affect social cohesion and democratic participation.
Is the media’s reality our reality?
There are several ways to understand this mistrust. First of all, Guido Keel urges us to distinguish between reality and its representation in the media. The media cannot invent facts, but they must select, prioritise and interpret information. Press releases, scientific publications, political statements… These are all sources available to journalists for creating content.
This selection is based on criteria such as proximity, importance or narrative potential. News that is close to home is more likely to be reported. Similarly, journalists cannot simply list facts: they must put them into context and construct a narrative to make them understandable. Depending on the angle chosen, the same reality can thus be interpreted in different ways.
This mediation explains why the media cannot be regarded as a perfectly accurate reflection of the world, which is not to say that they convey false information. The code of ethics for journalism, which emphasises objectivity, serves as a safeguard.
What determines our beliefs?
The public’s ability to analyse information also plays a part in the equation when it comes to trust. In the past, newsrooms acted as gatekeepers: they decided which information reached the public. Today, this role is much more dispersed.
Specialist websites, social media, algorithms, citizen journalism and publications by organisations and political parties all help to shape our information environment. Furthermore, the face-to-face conversations we have with those around us remain the foundation of the knowledge we accumulate.
When emotion takes precedence over information
On the internet, articles are short and headlines are attention-grabbing. Emotion need not necessarily be excluded from high-quality news. The problem arises when creating emotion becomes an end in itself to generate clicks. The informative purpose of a news item is then undermined.
How can we recognise news stories that play on our emotions? A provocative headline, strong terms such as ‘death’ or ‘catastrophe’, and the sharing of information taken out of context should raise our suspicions.
A method for approaching the news: SIFT
Guido Keel offers us a tool to guide our approach to information: stop, investigate, find better coverage and trace. ‘Stop’ means taking a moment to reflect before sharing or believing any content. ‘Investigate’: check the source of the information. ‘Find better coverage’: look at how the information is covered in other publications – is it confirmed, not mentioned, or contradicted? ‘Trace’: claims, images and figures can be traced back to their original source.
Ultimately, being sceptical of the media is not necessarily a problem. On the contrary, questioning a fact, its author or its context is part of good media literacy. The danger arises when no source is considered trustworthy anymore. In this case, it becomes difficult to build a common understanding of the facts and, consequently, to carry out collective projects.
Guido Keel’s webinar is part of our series of events entitled ‘Trump, Xi Jinping and your job’
