Fact or Fiction?

True Enough written by Farhad Manjoo explores the current crisis that faces media of the technology age: Fact vs. Fiction. In an age where trusted news involves four aging cronies who hate life along with old men who tout their own ideals (and books), many can see that fiction is easy to confuse with fact.


In chapter four Manjoo mentions an incident in which the child’s game of telephone snowballed out of control. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. published an article in Rolling Stone, alleging proof that President Bush stole the 2004 Election. This came from his knowledge of Steven Freeman’s articles on the subject, who in turn took his knowledge of the subject from Kathy Dopp whose information and research was faulty.

This silly game of telephone would be hilarious, if people could take the information they’re being given as “opinion” not “fact.” One recent instance of this “telephone effect” is the fiasco that was the 2008 Presidential election. Rumors ran wild about President Obama and his heritage, religion, and true place of birth. These gossipy tidbits spread by mouth, email and numerous social networks. Some wrote them off as untruths, but a dangerously high amount of people believed each rumor without a single question or thought.

The sources for these rumors? Unknown. The tangible data to support these facts? Nonexistent. In short, there is no proof to substantiate these claims, yet people give them credence. In school they teach us to never use Wikipedia and to always provide a source for our information. Why then, is it so hard for people today to demand sources from their news providers?

In all honesty I believe the answer more often than not is laziness. I’ll admit I’ve had a moment where I’m far too lazy to really research something and instead choose to quickly check Wikipedia for information. I would not, however, use this information to write a column or purport this knowledge as fact. The problem is, in a world where every second is worth money, easy avenues of information are taken when they shouldn’t be. It only takes one lazy and irresponsible person to misinform millions. Then those millions in turn misinform another million. It’s a spiraling snowball effect of disaster.

I found the Dr. Fox trick hilarious until I remembered my own personal experience in getting duped. My freshman year of college I had a professor for Humanities whose ideals of the world neared those of a paranoid psychotic. But he was interesting and some of the facts he told us were amazing. Like how Coke-cola created the red and white santa that we all know and love. This is untrue of course. After I found the cracks in this “fact” I began to unearth other “fact’s” he had taught us. All of them fictional ravings of what I now realize was a madman. I was horrified. I had hung onto every word he said because he was so dynamic, so eccentric and excited about the topics. I realize now that his enthusiasm and energy drew me in and made me complacent that he would only speak so passionately about things he knew incredibly well. That he was an “expert” in Humanities. I felt dirty when I came to realize he was, quite honestly, full of it. I couldn’t believe I had bought into his hype simply because of how earnestly he delivered it. I can identify with the victims—I mean test groups—of the Dr. Fox trial. I now obsess about checking facts and cross referencing sources to ensure that I’m not buying into anything someone is selling.