the truth and its absoluteness

We have been tasked to make an analysis about this article: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jul/12/how-technology-disrupted-the-truth?CMP=share_btn_tw in one of my subjects. I had a good time writing it, so I thought to upload it here. This is kind of political; thus, truly political. I hope it can open some perspectives. Feel free to share your thoughts!

The Truth and its absoluteness

by Jewel Liaison

Truth, as easy it is to utter, evident in its weak vowels, is one word that is hard to describe. In one Philosophy class session, I can recall how my classmates and I failed to answer the philosophical question, ‘’What is the Truth?’’ It was clearly emphasized to us the capitalization of its first letter: T to refer to it as something not merely an abstract word but something that possesses a power to affect various situations in different contexts. The answer to the question is truly applicable in the article: How technology disrupted the truth by Katharine Viner.

The article apparently speaks about the truth in a discourse, whereas, all people are interrelated, especially with the inclusion of the technology and internet. This heavily concerns the resources available and how these affect the flow of information given the inevitable involvement of the media. From the very start of social media engagement, the users are already incorporated to the vast virtual world where algorithms work swifter than the blink of eye. It was built as if it has been with the users since the beginning of their time, like the system know these people to the core. As the world forwards into becoming more modern, technology dependency increases. It appears that this reliance includes information absorption and dissemination because it has been considered, and will most probably, the main medium to get informed.

Journalism has emerged from print to digital media. While it is true that it has made information more accessible to individuals, its consequences are far more intriguing than the earlier times. As defined by Bell, the Tow Centre for Digital Journalism at Columbia University director – and Scott Trust board member, which owns the Guardian, “Our news ecosystem has changed more dramatically in the past five years than perhaps at any time in the past 500.” This proves that the world is hasty in changing. Of course, with the emergence of new and improved technologies, it is truly possible. Journalists pledged to tell factual news for the people. However, the technology disrupted this mission. The article posits that the essence of Journalism was degraded because the journalists lost their control. Slowly by slowly they are finding it hard to handle the truth; their purpose and power shifting from what once was for the people into profit and ruckus. The author observes that journalism care more about digital advertising. In the words of the author, ‘’it doesn’t care about the truthfulness of the article, rather how big news will it become; it seemed to focus more on the reputation instead of accuracy. The power of digital media is that it enables people to accept only what they believe and think is right.

Two terms are significant in the article which manipulate the interface and selections of the users. First, the term clickbait defined as set of words or any visuals that is designed to attract readers to click on a hyperlink that leads to usually a content with dubious intent. Clickbait is a significant factor in the digital media because it increases the number of web visits; thus, the popularity of the source spreads. News companies do this trick by writing a headline that is trigger some. Usually, it is misleading and not entirely related to the entirety of the article. Most of the time, users find it tiresome to read the whole content; therefore, relying on the headline alone. It is during this time that its effectiveness is applauded since it managed to stir up discussion from different parties of different perspectives. Second, the author mentioned the ‘filter bubble’ coined by Pariser. It is refers to the algorithms in the internet that decides the flow of one’s social networking timeline. It inevitably intrudes the users’ virtual privacy. This term explains why users see in their respective feed their preferences. It is so subjective and biased on prejudices. Due to this, the other side of the coin is neglected. Both terms are present and experienced in every account.

This era relies heavily on technology that it disrupts the truth. In the article, there is an example that is evidently misleading. The Hillsborough disaster had produced deadly mistakes and lies which lasted for a long time; it took how many decades to unleash the Truth. The people believed what the journalist presumed to be his truth because of the lack of other sources and due to his power to make other people believe his belief. It can be related to a recent murder in the Philippines that caused uproar in various social media account. Two people—mother and child was killed by a police officer. While the murder is undeniably unjust, some find it fortunate that the gruesome killing was caught on footage. The video enabled easy conviction for the murderer. This is the truth that was grasped with the help of technology. Imagine other murders happening everywhere but the killers and its proprietors are remained unmasked because of inadequate evidence.

The power that the digital media possess is godlike. Journalists can control the truth and circulate it online until it moves outside the virtual reality. It is disappointing to know that some choose to publish fallacy with hideous motives such as attention for gratifying fame. Nowadays, news publication inclines more as form of business, a transaction done easily without mattering the consequences as long as the profit comes along and the satisfaction of ruckus, validating the power they uphold. While it is true that money still plays a part since it is a career and main source of income for livelihood, it must not overpower the true mission of a journalist. The truth must be spread out by them, not them creating a truth and let readers believe or oppose it based on their prejudices. Digital media portrays this role of the giver in today’s time, but what do they take? The truth and its profound meaning, the principles and values, the time, the life.

Digital news reliance is harmful and scary because it never allows the users to see what is happening on the other side. It is truly hard to believe what is out there but it is not necessary. However, it is important to listen. By allowing this manipulative tactics, the discovering of the Truth’s meaning becomes harder to reveal. We are only looking in a façade of what we want to believe without risking to enter the inside of the building.

As I try to recall the answer of the philosophical question, ‘‘what is the Truth?’’ during that Philosophy class, I can remember the three steps of identifying it: conceptual analysis - quotation and assertion - reflection. First, lay all the facts presented by the media and analyse each concept. Second, verify the sources, find out the credibility of the writers and speakers. One should know whom to trust but not fully. Know that every source has its own assertions—what may be true to one may not be to the other. Each one has its own claims, including the readers. Lastly, reflection with two types: surface and profound-- the truth that is apparent and the absolute. Sometimes, it would be difficult to find it out, sometimes it is never truly possible. Truth may be subjective but it is always absolute.

I believe that the media has the power to stir things up but we can dismantle it if we choose to be critical. Both the giver and the receiver take roles in upholding the truth—technology are resources that allow us to access information easily. Do not let it be the top of the triangle; shift it and let the people in unity decide.