Newsrooms Countering Disinformation
This course looks at the particular challenges facing journalists in Georgia, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Moldova.
VIDEO
VIDEO
QUIZ
QUICK QUIZ
DISCUSSION
QUESTIONS FOR CLASSROOM DISCUSSION
Why do different groups create and spread fake news? Can you think of any such groups in Georgia/Armenia/Azerbaijan/Moldova? What could be their agenda?
Russian disinformation is widely spread in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine using similar methods. How does this information harm these countries? Do you think the impact is similar or different in each country?
Fake news often spreads virally, while debunking disinformation usually has a significantly smaller audience. Is there a point in debunking fake news if people are not reading it? What should those countering fake news do to be more efficient?
Independent journalists in oppressive regimes are often persecuted, while governments can become a source of disinformation. Should journalists put themselves in danger to reveal the truth? Is it a journalist’s duty to find out the truth at all costs?
Fake news and disinformation is increasing across the globe. What should governments, civil society groups and the media do to eliminate fake news and what would be the costs of it?
EXERCISES
You vs. Disinformation
Choose what you would do in these situations. Select your best options and discuss them in the class. There are no right or wrong answers, but some answers are more accurate than others.
CASE 1
You are the editor of an independent media outlet based in Tbilisi. Via Facebook you receive a link to a secret voice recording. There are two people in this recording, one apparently the opposition party candidate for the mayorship of Gori municipality and the other a Russian FSB official. The candidate agrees to receive 100,000 US dollars from the FSB official in exchange for organising far-right protest groups in Gori with the demand of renaming the city to New Stalingrad. The person who sent you the recording is not responding to your messages, his profile appears to be fake. The recording is uploaded on an empty website, which is registered in Ukraine under a fake name. You contact your trusted colleagues in Ukraine and they tell you that they don’t know this specific source, but it looks like other similar platforms which often spread fake news. Local elections are tomorrow, and according to the latest polls the opposition candidate is likely to win. What do you do?
Option 1
It could be a fake story or one fabricated by the ruling party to denounce the opposition candidate. Colleagues think that this is likely to be a fake source. If I publish this now, it could significantly affect the outcome of the elections tomorrow. Breaking such a story the day before elections is irresponsible, unless I’m 100 per cent sure. Even if I indicate that the information is not verified, nobody will pay attention to that. I will not publish until I research this thoroughly.
Option 2
The public interest is too high in this case and voters have the right to know all the information before they cast their ballots. I will write all as it is, indicate that the source is not verified and let everyone make their own judgements. It is irresponsible to withhold information as important as this.
CASE 2
You are an editor based in Kyiv. You received a story from Donbas about how local militia groups have recruited and trained a child soldier. The story does not look suspicious and you publish it the next morning. Two days later, a local fact-checking group contacts you and tells you that the photo is of a child actor from an Estonian yoghurt commercial. As fellow journalists, colleagues, they are giving you the chance to retract the story. You and your team then investigate the story and find out that it is fake. The project on conflict reporting is financed by a large international donor organisation that operates a network of local journalists in conflict regions across post-Soviet countries. This is the only source of income for local journalists who are living in dire circumstances. You spend several days investigating other stories funded by this project and find out that not only are the stories by the Donbas author partly or fully fake, but some other reporters have also submitted poorly verified stories. It is clear that the problem is systemic. The donor will suspend funding at best and is likely to cancel the partnership altogether if this comes out. It is one of your core projects and this will be a huge blow financially and in terms of reputation. In fact, you think that the outlet may not survive this. What do you do?
Option 1
Publish the retraction of the story on the child soldier and apologise, but significantly downgrade the magnitude of the problem and present this as one of the few isolated cases, promising to implement robust verification measures.
Option 2
Publish retractions on all stories that are unverified, share all the information with the donor and accept the consequences.
CASE 3
You are a journalist based in Yerevan. You are researching a network of news outlets who are publishing similar stories about how Russia is helping Armenia to combat coronavirus while Western countries do nothing. You suspect that this is a coordinated propaganda effort. You find out that reputable civil society organisations have reported that some of these outlets spread disinformation and may be connected to Russia. You show the materials to analysts and they agree that this looks like a coordinated effort. However, you are unable to link these sources to Russia directly. Do you have enough information to publish the story?
Option 1
Yes, the pattern of disinformation is already well researched. I will rely on interviews with analysts and NGO reports, include past examples of similar efforts and publish the story.
Option 2
No, I need to continue researching the story and establish direct links with Russia.