10 tips for spotting misinformation
Editor’s Note: This article is purely satirical and fictitious. All attributions in this article are not genuine, and this story should be read in the context of pure entertainment only.
With fake news at an all-time low nowadays, it’s easy to let down our guards and simply open our mouths to gulp from the firehose of knowledge available on the Internet. However, misinformation does still exist, and in our commitment to speaking truth to power, The Stanford Daily Humor section has assembled the following tips to keep you from being misinformed:
1. The article has a boring headline
If someone had a profound truth to share with the world, they’d do anything to get you to click on it. General rule of thumb: trustworthy and factual information is always preceded by a headline that’s urgent or targets common insecurities. Websites that post such titles are also generally safer to click on.
2. You can tell whoever wrote it was a nerd
Did you know that there’s a strong correlation between education level and propensity to make stuff up? As past Stanford presidents have demonstrated, smart people always try to stay the smartest, and lying to you keeps the pecking order safe.
3. Too much qualifying language
The words “potentially,” “may,” “suggest,” “correlation,” “technically,” etc. are just bailouts for the author in the case that they get caught lying. Oversimplified, black-and-white, radical language is a much better sign.
4. Too much bragging or “ethos building.”
“Trust me – I’m a doctor” is a logical fallacy. You know who else was a doctor? Bashar al-Assad. Honestly, I don’t know much about Syria, but I bet – scratch that – I know he must’ve lied about something.
5. The evidence isn’t cherry-picked.
The metaphor of cherry-picking is perfect for honest statistical practices: you only go for the best-looking, perfect cherries that fit the concept of what a cherry should be. You would never spend your hard-earned dollars on some lumpy, preconception-challenging, mal(in)formed cherries. Who wants those ugly cherries? I’m not eating that. I don’t care that your “science” says they’re perfectly fine and tasty – they look nasty. I only eat what fits my expectations.
6. There are no Oxford commas
“Oxford” sounds pretty smart when you think about it. It’s in England, which is the country of origin for the words “sophisticated” and “correct” in the English language. The AP format, the code of thieves all “established” print media executives must swear blood oaths to, does not permit the Oxford comma, and subsequently, intelligence. No Oxford commas are also a bad sign about a news source because it shows their newsroom is more focused on self-censorship rather than the big picture: increasing viewership by any means necessary.
7. The piece doesn’t fit into a political agenda
Politicians are regarded in the same echelon of honesty as leaders of organized religion – and, for both groups, extremism breeds reliability. If you’re ever confused about an article, use this short (but handy) heuristic: If you don’t think a politician would say it, it’s gotta be false.
8. You don’t want to believe it
Truth is like beauty: it’s subjective. And while beauty is in the eye of the beholder, we can all agree cognitive dissonance needs Botox. If something bothers you, just ignore it.
9. They provide a list of credible sources
Reporting something that you heard from someone else – who heard it from someone else – who heard it from someone else – is like playing the game “Telephone.” Of course, as the reader, you’re that last guy at the end who says what they heard and then gets laughed at like an idiot. Reasonably assuming most journalists have malicious intent, this game was set up to fail from the start. Whenever you see a “bibliography,” just imagine a group of people snickering behind a computer screen, watching you read their collective ruse.
10. It doesn’t come with some sort of disclaimer that says, “Editor’s Note: This article is purely satirical and fictitious.”
According to the U.S. Surgeon General, 100% factual information isn’t safe for consumption by the general public, so implanting the seed of doubt into all readers is a safety measure. No need for a “warning” means there’s no real truth. I mean, look at this article. It has a disclaimer, but I didn’t lie to you once.
The post 10 tips for spotting misinformation appeared first on The Stanford Daily.