Social media reporting is a double-edged sword

Jan 13, 2025 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Peeping Tom…

Kaieteur News- Social media has undoubtedly changed how we share and receive information. It has made communication more open to everyone. Once you have a smart phone or a computer and internet and Facebook accounts, your are within the reach of social media.

Social media gives those who might otherwise not have a say, an opportunity to say  what they think and to propagate what their views, however profound or misguided these are. But one of its prime attractions is that social media is often the first place where important news is shared.  Yet, lurking beneath the immediacy of social media’s allure is a peril that cannot be ignored. Social media, for all its wonders, carries the insidious danger of sacrificing truth at the altar of speed.

The problem is one of nature and nurture. Social media’s nature is instantaneous; its nurture, collective. The race to post the next viral revelation or scandal leaves no time to pause for fact-checking, to seek opposing perspectives, or to provide context. In mainstream journalism, editors are supposed to interrogate every assertion and reporters are supposed to confirm a story from multiple angles. On the other hand, social media thrives on impulsive reactions and half-told tales.

This isn’t a dismissal of social media’s potential for good. The immediacy that makes it dangerous also makes it powerful. It gets its news across, gets it across fast and to a large audience. But for every breakthrough, there are a dozen false starts—stories shared in haste that crumble under scrutiny, leaving reputations tarnished.

Consider the life cycle of a social media scandal. Someone alleges wrongdoing, perhaps corruption, a breach of contract or an act of fraud. The post, often accompanied by an attention-grabbing headline gains traction.  Social media influencers pick it up and transmit it to their followers with righteous indignation. By the time anyone thinks to ask for proof or context, the damage is done. The accused becomes a trending topic, their name forever linked to accusations that may or may not hold water.

A recent example comes to mind. A social media report alleged fraudulent conduct in what was essentially a contractual dispute. The story, told from one perspective, questioned why authorities weren’t pursuing criminal charges. It conveniently omitted to make the point that not all breaches of agreement rise to the level of criminality. Fraudulent misappropriation, a criminal offence, requires proof of dishonest intent—something that cannot be established without a thorough investigation and an opportunity for the accused to provide their side.

But the post didn’t concern itself with such legal niceties. It presented one side, and the public, hungry for scandal, swallowed it whole. In cases like these, the remedy often lies in civil court, where disputes over breach of contract, unjust enrichment, or even fraudulent misrepresentation are adjudicated. These are complex matters, requiring careful examination of evidence and intent. But to the casual social media user, the distinctions between civil and criminal law are unimportant. What matters is the narrative, the drama, the rush of judgment that comes with a well-timed post.

This phenomenon isn’t new. Humanity has always been susceptible to rumour and hearsay. What’s changed is the scale and speed at which misinformation can spread. In an earlier era, unverified claims might circulate during the tea break at work or in the pages of an obscure tabloid. Today, they can reach millions via social media.

The rise of so-called social media influencers has only exacerbated the problem. These individuals are often untrained in the principles of journalism. Many influencers lack the resources—or the inclination—to verify the stories they share. They are, in essence, transmitters of information, not arbiters of truth.

Mainstream media, with all its flaws, remains a crucial counterweight. It provides the balance and context that social media so often lacks. Reporters, bound by ethical codes, are supposed (operative word being supposed) to be trained to dig deeper, to question assumptions, and to present all sides of a story. They are not infallible. They do make mistakes, sometimes the same ones as social media influencers. But their different approach to news dissemination offers an antidote to the often recklessness of social media reporting.

As consumers of information, we must do our part. Before accepting a claim at face value, we should ask: Who is telling this story, and what is their agenda? Is there evidence to support the allegation? Have all sides had a chance to speak? Truth, as the saying goes, is rarely simple. It is messy, multifaceted, and often slow to emerge. The next time a scandal breaks on social media, take a breath. Resist the urge to react immediately. The truth, elusive and complex, deserves more than a click or a share. It deserves our patience.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

(Social media reporting is a double-edged sword)

 

---

• instantaneous, Many influencers lack the resources, Peeping Tom, principles of journalism, smart phone

---