Facebook – currently the only alternative media source I use to derive my knowledge of world happenings… and I don’t even do it consciously. Whatever appears in my newsfeed, whether it’s ‘Luke Jones was marked safe during Hurricane Debbie’ or an article from the mysterious ‘UNILAD’ page, I generally absorb this information. However, since these forms of communication are the only version of whatever truths are out there that I receive, my understanding of the issue tends to be extremely rudimentary.
Seriously though, what criteria do we use to establish notions of source credibility? An article by Jay Rosen in 2008 details that our current trajectory of convergence grants anyone the ability to broadcast any message they desire through a series of online channels and sites (take 4chan for example), with no implicit filter or influence of gatekeepers to control the quality of the content being produced and exhibited for the wider world to see. However, allow me to transport you back to 2013 when a Danish news channel utilised the backdrop for ‘Assassin’s Creed’ as the Damascus skyline after mistaking images for war. With situations like this becoming evermore frequent, are my Facebook readings really any less trustworthy than the legacy media itself?