There’s no disputing that new media like Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube play an important role in keeping us informed. There is, in fact, reason to believe that these social networking sites are superior to the traditional media in at least one crucial way: timeliness.
In the spring of 2007, many Virginia Tech students learned, via desperate posts on Facebook, that a gunman was taking their friends’ and classmates’ lives.
There is, however, a problem with these new ways of communicating. A lot of people — quite understandably — take news on their Facebook and Twitter feeds with the same authority as an article on the Toronto Star’s website. Posts on new media websites are not held to — nor are they expected to conform to — the rigid journalistic standards of traditional media.
All of these issues were underscored in thick boldface at the end last week when word that Pat Burns died began circulating. Burns, who is 58, has been battling an incurable form of lung cancer since 2009.
On Friday morning when I woke up and checked Facebook on my Blackberry, like I normally do, a friend-associate of mine had “RIP Pat Burns” in his status on my newsfeed. I immediately thought, “Well darn, that’s too bad.” The person who wrote that was actually a far more active social media-user than most and has broken various pieces of information (like concert pre-sale passwords and lineup changes) with impressive accuracy.
Turns out, though, that Pat Burns was still alive. My friend was not the source of the rumour, but rather one of thousands of people who picked up on it and spread it. Apparently the Leafs Senior Advisor, Cliff Fletcher, told Toronto media reporters he had just learned of his good friend Burns had died, and having no reason to doubt Fletcher, they shared the news. Most notably, the Toronto Star’s Damien Cox tweeted it.
It’s tough to imagine how Fletcher could have been erroneously informed that Burns was dead — but seemingly he was, and apologized for it.
So let’s draw some lessons from this incident, while Pat Burns is still alive to enjoy them.
Fact-filter what you read on Facebook and Twitter. If it’s someone tweeting about a traffic jam that they’re stuck in, it’s a safe bet that you shouldn’t take the street they’re on. But if the issue is more substantive — say, someone’s death, a gunman on campus, a major political scandal — please, please, please seek outside corroboration before assuming for yourself that the story is true.
If you can’t find immediate corroboration but must share anyway, add a caveat: “According to so-and-so [insert rumour here].” This way, no one can point to you as the source of an erroneous report, and you won’t be on the hook if the rumour is untrue.
Let’s see if we can keep Pat Burns alive for just a little longer.
