FAKE NEWS: THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH

     The expression FAKE NEWS has become a popular and important one in today's political arena. Yet Fake News has been around for a long time, going back to the idea of "Yellow Journalism" coined in the mid 1890s (where it meant little or no well-researched news). Annenberg School's Dr. Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a well-known rhetorical scholar, is probably one of  the only persons to make sense of it in its present context.  She labeled the term an OXYMORON ( " contradictory terms appearing in conjunction with each other")  and she was right on the button. In other words, "Fake" is not real; "News" is  authentic. 

     Analyzing the term further, It is the nature of TRUTH that defines fake news.

     One characterization is truth's ambiguity.  What truth is to one person may not be so to another individual. It seem to this critic that truth may be equated with personal perceptions:  "the mental process through which we interpret that which we sense," according to the communication book, "Understanding and Sharing" by Pearson and Nelson. Such process takes into account filtering features that may change the way we see the world, like our education, religion, gender, race and a myriad of other factors, including past experiences, present feelings and circumstances.

     For example, a car accident occurs and one observer interprets the event one way; another person describes it another way. Who is right? What is the truth? This example recalls a famous exercise required of law students where individual perceptions lead to different conclusions.

     Of course, there are many other ways to determine truth, some ambiguous, some probably not. Consider the Scientific Method, which lessens the role individual perceptions play in ambiguity. Used since the 17th century, experiments prove the validity of a hypothesis resulting in a theory or law of nature. While this may sound simplistic, the scientific community employs the Scientific Method to prove what is truth.

     Many disciplines besides science have their own theories of truth. What about epistemology, from philosophical tenets, which determines how truth and falsity relate to the world? There are even sources from the Bible which help figure out truth, like the Solomonic Judgement, where King Solomon decides which of two women is a baby's mother. How about from media itself with the respected movie, "Rashomon," directed by Akira Kurosawa? A husband is killed, and the plot is devoted to who killed him as seen through the eyes of three Japanese villagers:  was it his wife, a bandit who loves her or himself?

     There are other ways that truth can be ascertained, but, unfortunately,  this critic can not name their exact sources. Where does belief come from, for instance? We can believe in  the presence of God, yet we have no evidence to prove that particular truth. We can accept truth through instinct as well, but where is the proof, some would say?

     The most relevant source today of where truth lies is with Donald Trump. This makes sense. We have learned to accept truths from an individual whom we respect, for diverse reasons: for example, our parents have told us many things in our lives, and we accept it as true. The same reasoning is valid with our community leaders and teachers. 

     So why not accept Trump's truths? Maybe we could if we subjected them to The Scientific Method?