Editor's Note: For the last few months, RANGE has been working with the junior and senior students at The Community School to help each of them develop a piece of journalistic writing about a local or recent news topic that interested them. As they reached the end of the capstone project, we selected a few articles that we professionally edited and will be publishing on our website in the coming weeks as part of a series we're calling The Young RANGE. Through this project we've been constantly in awe at the level of student engagement, the quality of work and the RANGE of topics the youth were passionate about. We're beyond excited to introduce you to these students and their work, continuing with today's piece on how the youth consume news by Lydia Schlazer. - Erin Sellers
At the beginning of the spring semester, my 12th grade class was doing a project where we filmed and edited news stories. When our teacher asked where we all get our news from, a few of my classmates answered until someone said, “The talking fish guy,” followed by “Yeah!” “The one on Tiktok?” “I love him.” “Oh, same!”
The way people consume news is changing. According to Pew Research, American adults over the age of 65 trust news from social media 28% less than they trust national news outlets. For adults 18 to 29 however, the trust gap is only 6%. The National Institute on Drug Abuse also found that from 1990 to 2016 the percentage of 10th graders who read the newspaper daily dropped 31%.
Young people are increasingly trusting social media as an accurate news source, preferring it over established news outlets like CNN, BBC, The Guardian and the New York Times. In general, more social media apps are serving as news outlets for their users. Tiktok, in particular, has the most growth, with 21% more users getting news from there in the last three years.
This can be problematic because creators of news on social media are often motivated by engagement numbers over accuracy of reports, which can lead to polarizing content, misinformation and oversimplification, like the talking fish emblematic of the account BikiniBottomNews, which has since been banned from Tiktok
What young people want from their news
I conducted a survey in my own high school, The Community School in Spokane, and of the 40 students surveyed, 20 of them listed Tiktok, Instagram, Facebook or YouTube as one of their main news sources. Interestingly, only one of these students listed a form of social media as “the best” news source. So, what is driving young people to get their news from sources that they don’t think are the most accurate?
When asked why they valued their main news source, students who listed social media sources made up 61% of those who chose “quick” and “entertaining.” Meanwhile, these students made up just 40% of the people who chose “unbiased” and “accurate.”
If you compare leafing through a newspaper or even reading an article online to just scrolling Instagram, one is clearly more appealing to teenagers. The cost for most social media apps is nothing. The only work required is the occasional lift of your finger, and the creators don't use complicated terms. It updates constantly, it has graphics and videos and best of all, you can share your own reaction without feeling like it’s “adult stuff” that you have no say in. Teenagers are not motivated to go out of their way for a boring black and white paper or pay for an online subscription for something that has zero talking fish.
Elena Perry, the Education Reporter for the Spokesman Review, said, “The Spokesman costs $2 at grocery stores, but if (teenagers) have $2, you’re going to buy a Red Bull, not a newspaper.”
She went on to explain, “Mostly [the Spokesman] appeals to older audiences who already support us. It might be a generational thing where they just grew up holding physical newspapers.”
How social media apps and creators profit
Not only is social media news easy to access, but it’s tailored to individual preferences. Unlike online and paper newspapers, social media apps can use algorithms to determine what to show you. These algorithms are designed to keep you on the app, as most social media companies generate revenue through advertisements that rely on impressions and views.
Because of this, your news feeds on these apps will likely include opinions that align with yours, resulting in echo chambers, or provocative statements that will grab your attention. Any reaction — liking, disliking, subscribing, following, etc. — you have to a news piece is recorded by the app. What is on your feed is perfectly chosen content that can distract from the sense of distrust that you might usually feel when you notice everyone is agreeing with you.
No one wants to believe their understanding of world events is biased. If your neighbor started telling you about the local sheriff election in a way that was “based on your preferences” or the newspaper at your door was “recommended for you,” you would be more likely to sense that you are consuming news from a biased source.
Your local and national news station and paper rely on viewers and readers just as much as social media apps do, but they have greater motivators for accuracy. The vast majority of established news outlets can be held accountable for misinformation by their subscribers. Concerned people can call editors, file complaints, boycott or even protest outside the building. Reporters can be fired, documents can be found and newspapers can — and do — go bankrupt.
Because of these threats, many news outlets focus on double checking their facts and looking into any loose ends. “We always ask for documents, we can never say we are sure if we aren’t, and we always try to talk to the people who said something so we have the context for it,” Perry said.
Few of these motivators, however, can be enforced. Perry even told me that unbiased reporting is mostly an individual choice to look at both sides of the story.
The Journalism Code of Ethics from the Society of Professional Journalists preaches “truth, accuracy, transparency, accountability, and objectivity.” However, the very line on the document says, “[the SPJ code of ethics] is not, nor can it be under the First Amendment, legally enforceable.” (Journalistic objectivity, too, is a tricky subject.)
Honesty and accuracy on social media are even harder to enforce. Creators are individual people who can avoid being tracked down, and they usually have no peers or bosses to answer to. For individuals posting news on their social media app of choice, profit is derived from views, shares and likes. This is quite different from a newspaper whose profits come from readers who value their reputation of accurate reporting. An incredibly detailed synopsis of a complicated issue is unlikely to get the same amount of clicks as a shocking image with a catchy caption.
Social media companies are also protected from responsibility of information spread by users under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act which declares “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”
This means that if a Tiktok user said that the CDC is poisoning the water, and thousands of people believed them, Tiktok cannot face legal consequences for the harm done because of a statement which reached large audiences on their platform. This lack of legal accountability combined with the profit to be gained from polarizing or inaccurate content creates the perfect environment for social media apps to avoid penalizing creators who post misinformation.
How to combat misinformation
There are three main methods to fighting misinformation from social media. The first is government restrictions: the government could change Section 230 and begin to crack down on social media companies that allow the perpetuation of fake news. According to NBC, President Joe Biden and many conservative politicians have tried to push for changes (specifically regarding algorithms) to Section 230.
However, there is widespread concern about additional restrictions leading to legal consequences for everyday people, many of whom are content creators. There is also concern that requiring accurate speech could violate the First Amendment. Opponents of these restrictions often compare them to George Orwell’s 1984 or say the government will engage in “truth policing.” This concern appears to be shared by some young people.
An anonymous student in the survey I conducted even wrote that Tiktok was the best news source “... because America can’t intervene.”
The second method to combating misinformation is teaching media literacy in schools. 19 states, including Washington, currently have some form of media literacy education in schools. This method of misinformation prevention, according to The Washington State Standard, has strong bipartisan support, though it relies heavily on kids implementing what they’re taught in their everyday lives.
“School is a logical place to present the information and teach and model good behavior, but each person must use that knowledge in practice in their personal lives. As with most issues, it is a shared responsibility,” said Chris Schwalm, Youth Media Producer at PBS NewsHour.
The third method is outreach: this method involves trustworthy news sources creating media that appeals to a wider — and younger — audience. Perry explained how The Spokesman Review has started “ramping up” their Instagram presence: “It takes a lot less to look at a photo.”
News outlets and journalists across the country (including RANGE) are putting their content on Tiktok and other social media platforms to counteract misinformation and reach younger people.
“Panels with members from major news outlets meet regularly to figure out how to engage young people,” Schwalm said.
“The answer is not simple, but here are some of the thoughts coming out of these meetings: meet young people where they are — on social media, reframe the content in a style young people are accustomed to and include young voices.”
