Propaganda, lies, and power: How fake news shapes the world

For media to regain credibility, journalism needs to embrace rigorous fact checking and balanced reporting

The ideal of a completely neutral, fact-driven press may be utopian, but striving for it is essential. We, as consumers of news, must be vigilant. Instead of passively accepting information, we need to question sources, cross-check facts, and support media organisations committed to truth rather than agendas

We live in an era where truth is increasingly elusive. Social media, once heralded as a tool for democratic discourse, has instead become a battlefield where disinformation thrives. People are forming opinions and making decisions—including who to vote for—based on falsehoods carefully crafted by those with hidden agendas.

A striking example is the widespread belief among millions of Americans that the 2020 US presidential election was “stolen.” Despite dozens of court rulings, extensive fact-checking, and multiple recounts confirming its legitimacy, the idea of electoral fraud has been deeply ingrained in a significant portion of the population. This falsehood—repeated by politicians, amplified by partisan media, and disseminated through social media—has led to real-world consequences, including the storming of the US Capitol on 6 January 2021 in a violent attempt to overturn the election results.

Not limited to politics

The consequences of disinformation are not limited to politics. In 2023, violent riots erupted in the UK after false claims circulated online that a young immigrant had murdered a child. The suspect, in reality, was neither an immigrant nor Muslim, but misinformation spread rapidly, stoking racial tensions and fuelling violence. Similarly, during the COVID-19 pandemic, conspiracy theories about vaccines led to widespread hesitancy, prolonging the crisis and causing unnecessary deaths. These are not isolated incidents—they are evidence of how easily public opinion can be manipulated.

Governments, too, have recognised the power of controlling narratives, often using state media as propaganda tools. Russia’s state-controlled media, for example, has played a central role in shaping public perception of the Ukraine war. Many Russians, exposed only to Kremlin-approved narratives, genuinely believe that their country is engaged in a necessary “special military operation” rather than an unjustified invasion. When governments control all major media outlets, the line between news and propaganda disappears entirely.

Yet disinformation isn’t solely the product of rogue actors or authoritarian regimes. Even mainstream, established media outlets are often driven by the political leanings of their owners. Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News and Sky News, for instance, have consistently prioritised right-wing narratives, at times distorting facts to serve their audience’s expectations. Meanwhile, networks like CNN are often criticised for their left-leaning slant, contributing to an increasingly polarised media environment. Instead of informing citizens, news outlets increasingly serve as echo chambers, reinforcing biases rather than challenging them.

Decline in diverse and independent reporting

In his insightful book, The Men Who Killed the News, Eric Beecher delves into how media ownership and commercial interests have compromised journalistic integrity. He argues that the concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few has led to a decline in diverse and independent reporting. This consolidation often results in news coverage that prioritises the interests of owners and advertisers over the public’s need for unbiased information. Beecher’s analysis serves as a stark reminder of the challenges facing modern journalism and underscores the need for a re-evaluation of media structures to preserve the democratic function of the press.

Sri Lanka is no stranger to media bias and political influence over journalism. For years, various media houses have been seen as favouring certain political factions, with some outlets shifting allegiances depending on the government in power. Truly independent investigative journalism has often been sidelined, and one of the most tragic examples of this was the assassination of The Sunday Leader editor Lasantha Wickrematunge in 2009. His newspaper was one of the few that dared to challenge those in power, and his killing sent a chilling message about the risks of true investigative journalism in Sri Lanka.

Contd. on Page 17

(The writer is a business leader with extensive experience in hospitality, tourism, and corporate strategy. As Chairman and CEO of privately owned companies and a board member of three publicly listed PLCs, he is actively involved in hotel development, asset management, and investment ventures. Beyond his professional expertise, he has a deep personal interest in global affairs, politics, media, and the evolving landscape of democracy. While not a scholar in these fields, he is an avid observer and reader, continually engaging with diverse perspectives and critical issues shaping the world today. His writing reflects this broader curiosity, offering insights beyond the realm of tourism and business.)

A truly independent news outlet

These challenges raise an urgent question: Can there ever be a truly independent news outlet? The Guardian in the UK is often cited as an example of a media organisation free from corporate ownership, but even it is not without bias. A model worth considering is nonprofit investigative journalism organisations like ProPublica, which prioritise factual, in-depth reporting without commercial pressures.

For media to regain credibility, journalism needs to embrace rigorous fact checking and balanced reporting. One approach could be ensuring that every major investigative piece is reviewed by journalists with opposing viewpoints to provide a fair and comprehensive analysis. Another could be adopting publicly funded, journalist-owned models, ensuring that news organisations are accountable to the public rather than political or corporate interests.

However, the reality remains that disinformation is evolving faster than our ability to combat it. The Trump administration’s recent move to grant White House press accreditation to select social media outlets—while dismissing traditional media—illustrates the growing trend of governments cultivating their own “friendly” media, further eroding journalistic independence.

The ideal of a completely neutral, fact-driven press may be utopian, but striving for it is essential. We, as consumers of news, must be vigilant. Instead of passively accepting information, we need to question sources, cross-check facts, and support media organisations committed to truth rather than agendas.