Commentary

Contextualizing Fake Asia Pacific Media Educator

27(1) 41–50
News in Post-truth Era: © 2017 University of
Wollongong, Australia
Journalism Education SAGE Publications
sagepub.in/home.nav
in India DOI: 10.1177/1326365X17702277
http://ame.sagepub.com

Harikrishnan Bhaskaran1
Harsh Mishra1
Pradeep Nair1

Abstract
The current debate on fake-news is heavily focused on American and British post-
truth politics and the tactical use of ‘alternative facts’. However, the concerns
about the impact of fake news on journalism are not restricted to European
and American contexts only. This commentary attempts to examine journalism
practice and training in India in the post-truth era. Unlike the issues projected in
the American debate on the need to reengage and empathize with the non-elite
audience and the rise of a fact-checking culture, the apprehensions appear to be
slightly different in other countries. In India, tackling the post-truth era challenges
is also about addressing obstructive institutional forces like inactive regulatory
bodies and out-dated curricula in University-based journalism programmes. The
commentary argues that Indian journalism educators should focus on formulating
a dynamic curriculum framework that integrates collaborative verification
practices with an emphasis on reengaging with the audience to address the
enigmatic post-truth politics in the country.

Keywords
Fake news, post-truth era, journalism education in India, verification, boundary
work

1
Central University of Himachal Pradesh, Shahpur, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, India.

Corresponding author:
Pradeep Nair, Associate Professor and Dean, School of Journalism, Mass Communication and
New Media (SoJMC&NM) at Central University of Himachal Pradesh, India.
E-mail: nairdevcom@yahoo.co.in
42 Asia Pacific Media Educator 27(1)

Introduction
Fake news is not a new phenomenon. It has always been present in one form or
another. As early as 1835, the New York Sun published a six-part series claiming
there was life on the Moon. In 1844, some newspapers in Philadelphia published
false reports about Irishmen stealing Bibles from public schools leading to riots
(Soll, 2017; Glasser, 2016; Ross, 2017). Joseph Pulitzer’s the New York World and
William Hearst’s the New York Herald may be considered as the first proponents
of ‘fake news’ publishing highly dramatized and sensationalist versions of events
in their newspapers to increase revenue. The practice continues today with the
only difference being that the rise of the Internet and different social media
platforms has made the spread of fake news lightning fast.

Sailing the Same Boat: Fake News and Indian Media

India is no stranger to the phenomenon. For instance, on 21 September 1995, the
rumour mills churned out the ‘news’ that Lord Ganesha’s (a popular Hindu god)
idols are drinking milk and so called ‘news’ spread like wildfire (BBC, 2016;
dainikbhaskar.com, 2015; inextlive, 2015). Devotees queued outside the temples
for hours in order to offer milk to the deity. Indian newspapers went crazy giving
extensive coverage to this fake story. The then Leader of the Opposition, Atal
Bihari Vajpayee, was shown offering milk to the deity in a television news story
(bhaskar.com, 2015). The fake story even received international coverage with
media giants, such as BBC, CNN, the Guardian, the Daily Express and the New
York Times, giving space to it. Obviously, the religious inclinations of the
journalists and not journalistic ethics were at work during the coverage of this
story. Similar stories still find place in mainstream Indian media. The level of
attention this story received from the media and the public was astonishing in
view of the fact that no internet or social media was present then. Consider for a
moment, the impact this story would have had in the current era of internet and
social media.
The story is still alive and surfaces occasionally. For instance, an online article
published by a website owned by one of the biggest media conglomerates in India
claimed that Lord Nandi’s idol was drinking milk (inextlive, 2015). Now, this
was a harmless hoax to a large extent. But, consider recent cases, including the
Muzaffarnagar Riots and the Dadri Lynching Mob. In the former case, a viral video
of the mob lynching of two teenaged boys in Sialkot, Pakistan, was circulated on
social media platforms as an incident occurring in Muzaffarnagar, India. This
sparked a deadly communal which leads to the deaths and displacement of many
people. In the latter case, communal elements attempted to justify the mob lynching
of a man in Dadri, Uttar Pradesh, by circulating fake videos of cow slaughter.
These are just two instances of how havoc can be wreaked by fake news in a
country like India. Some other fake news stories doing the rounds on social media,
Bhaskaran et al. 43

which are not as catastrophic as those mentioned above, include UNESCO’s

declaration of the Indian Prime Minister and the Indian National Anthem as the
best in the world. These stories regularly re-surface in social media circles, often
appearing in regional and local media outlets too. Similarly, other fake news
stories which have received popular attention in India recently include accounts
about the presence of GPS chips and radioactive ink in the newly issued `2,000
notes to track down hoarders of black money, and images of the US President
Donald Trump supporting the Indian Prime Minister during state elections in
India. All these fake news stories are being shared, liked or re-tweeted in huge
numbers by social media users in India.
A majority of social media users in India are urban based and enjoy a privileged
background with a certain level of general and media literacy. Some of the
propagators of these news stories are highly educated. The question is: ‘what
makes them spread such fake news stories?’ One obvious answer may relate to the
low levels of media literacy among people who were accustomed to traditional
media platforms and associated notions of credibility. Their ignorance about the
self-publishing capabilities of social media spaces also makes it difficult for them
to separate fact from fiction. However, it should be noted that this gullibility is not
just due to social media illiteracy, but also because of reasonable amount of
slacktivist convenience.
Scholars looking at the influence of the post-truth scenario in this phenomenon
have identified the existence of echo chambers and bubbles of information sources
(Sunstein, 2009). Facilitated by the social media algorithms which make sure that
the information in individual news feeds is tailored to suit users’ own beliefs,
perspectives and interests, these bubbles reduce the chances of people finding
diverse views on social media spaces (Pariser, 2011).

In Pursuit of Panacea: Putting Post-truth

into Perspective
The introspective debate in the US—mainly from the elite press—about the
popularity of fake news acknowledges their failure to engage with the disenchanted,
non-elite, fragmented audience. As a remedy, it is seeking ways to re-engage with
the audience and to re-establish the lost trust. This was highlighted recently by the
New York Times’ decision to spend US$2.5 million running an advertisement
during the Oscars ceremony talking about truth. Another development, away from
the mainstream industry, but related to the proliferation of fake news in the post-
truth era, is the rise of online fact-checking initiatives, spreading and reinforcing
what in the past was an American initiative globally (Graves & Cherubini, 2016).
The ongoing focus on post-truth era challenges to journalistic practice also
emphasize the role played by networked news media platforms as the cornerstone
of the attention economy which the fake-news producers presently depend on. But
44 Asia Pacific Media Educator 27(1)

the reluctance of networked media giants to admit their role and to take proactive
measures to curb the circulation of falsehoods has invited scholarly criticism
(Bell, 2017). Facebook, after coming under fire for an initial refusal to acknowledge
its role in the propagation of fake news, has now announced that it will roll out
algorithmic as well as manual ways to enable consumers to sift through fake and
real news. It has also imposed financial sanctions on lie-mongering sites and
pages (Owen, 2017). Some scholars and observers are calling for the perfect
algorithm which can relentlessly spot fake news on social media platforms
(Berghel, 2017; Walk-Morris, 2016, pp. 34–35). Using human review systems to
tackle fake news on social media is also being practised. The possibility that
algorithms can be reductionist and human reviewers biased places serious question
marks besides both solutions to this problem. Such aggressive attempts may even
cripple factual stories that promote alternate narratives by classifying them as
fake news since they do not conform to the majoritarian view.
While the concern in the US and UK is focused on how audiences seem to
prefer fake news over factual news, in India, they are more basic and different.
Here, the first concern is about media organizations and journalists going for, or
rather falling for, fake news and half-truths propagated by post-truth era politicians
and partisan groups mainly through social media platforms.
In India, this pattern became conspicuous with the change in the ruling
government in 2014. Winning power by riding on the nationalist and anti-
incumbent wave two years ago, the present right-wing government has widely
used typical post-truth tactics. Its strategy has been heavily focused on connecting
to people emotionally, by cherry-picking facts and presenting half-truths, even
lying to sustain popularity. It came as a complete package—a larger than life
image of the Prime Minister, preferential treatment to social media platforms over
mainstream media as outlets of government information, organized propagation
of lies and half-truths related to national security through these platforms, media
bashing to the tune of a serving minister calling journalists ‘presstitutes’, and
instances of clamping down on some mainstream media organizations both at
national and regional levels which took a clear anti-government stand (Bagri,
2017).
In line with the global trend, the present shift to a regime of post-truth politics
favoured the right-wing which depends heavily on the promotion of nationalistic,
xenophobic perspectives. The first challenge for Indian journalists in this
environment involved reasserting their commitment to fact-finding and truth
telling. For example, in one case, television channels appeared to willingly air
doctored videos that branded student protestors as anti-national.
This manifested itself a number of other ways too, with some journalists
apparently enamoured with the Prime Minister. Their enthusiasm to click selfies
with the Prime Minister during his first press briefing after assuming office
highlighted the extent to which idolatry may be obstructing factual reporting.
Equally disturbing was a video clip showing senior journalists from a popular
Indian news channel excitedly discussing the GPS technology in the new currency
note. Their excitement was blinding their rational judgement as journalists.
Bhaskaran et al. 45

So in a way, fighting fake news in India is much easier since it is about just
going back to and sticking to the basic tenets of journalism—of being sceptical, of
cross-checking and steering clear of personal subjectivities and prejudices while
gathering and reporting news. This is where the journalist educators in India have
a crucial role to play in the fight against fake news. However, the present picture
is not very rosy.

Educators Dilemma: Dealing with the Institutional

Impediments
The institutional response to fake news in India is quite lackadaisical in comparison
to Europe. India’s ethics watchdog, the independent Press Council, is little more
than a paper tiger when it comes to enforcing strict regulatory measures. The
council has the authority to determine disputes and complaints on media
organizations’ violation of ethical norms like instances of paid news and fake
news. However, neither the Press Council nor one of the self-regulatory bodies
like the Editors Guild have made any significant moves against the growing
instances of fake news and state-sponsored lies propagated through mainstream
news organizations.
Media organizations have likewise acted in an irresponsible manner by
publishing fake news. While corrections are a usual practice in such cases, many
Indian media houses never bother to issue an apology or correction if fake news
is published (Shinde, 2017). It appears that such instances are accepted as
collateral damage in the industry. This negligent attitude by industry, along with
failed attempts by regulatory bodies to embrace media accountability, places
additional responsibilities on journalism educators to highlight the ethical issues
involved.
But ironically, most of the academics involved in journalism training in the
Indian sub-continent typically lack any kind of newsroom experience. Academics
working as journalism teachers are mostly utilized by the journalism departments
as scholars rather than as trainers. Most of these scholars-turned journalism teach-
ers do not have any hands-on training or experience in the journalistic verification
of facts, inclusion of evidence and sequencing of information and an overall open
and inclusive approach to journalistic ethics. Contrary to this, in Europe, the
United States, UK and Australia, journalism education located within universities
is carried out by journalists and former journalists who are often disparagingly
identified as ‘hackademics’ (Tony, 2011). They have the advantage of their pro-
fessional experience and the cognitive knowledge base derived from it when it
comes to training budding journalism practitioners. Whereas the Indian universi-
ties appoint journalism teachers on the basis of their doctoral degree and/or on the
basis of a National Eligibility Test (NET) conducted by the University Grants
Commission (UGC), the apex body of higher education under the Ministry of
46 Asia Pacific Media Educator 27(1)

Human Resource Development. This lack of professional experience among

journalism educators in Indian universities manifests into another institutional
obstacle—out-dated curriculum for journalism training.
News as the representation of reality and action and newsrooms as an institution
with a defined role in the construction of social reality has demanded that the
practice of news reporting be considered as a social practice which requires a
better understanding of human perspectives and human interpretation (Ward,
2010). But the ‘right here, right now’ credo of the news broadcast has made the
whole process of newsgathering and story construction a more complex job. Apart
from this race for eyeballs, the new economic realities of news trade like the
Internet and precisely the social media as the growing revenue platforms and the
undeniable market value of user-generated content (UGC) in the attention
economy have also shifted the challenges and realities of journalistic practice
across platforms. Ideally, these changes should be absorbed into the curricula and
pedagogy of journalism education offered by universities and institutions of
higher learning. But unfortunately, the media schools of Indian universities were
not able to incorporate the changes taking place in journalism practice and praxis
in their curricula and training modules.
Even in this digital era of newsgathering and reporting, most journalism
programmes in Indian media institutions are still struggling to find a balance
between journalism as practice and praxis (see Omraam, 1987, for a Marxist
discussion of this point). It is time to switch to a more reflective news reporting
curriculum, one that moves beyond teaching the tips and techniques of news
reporting to a theoretical understanding of creative, innovative and non-traditional
approaches to reporting news (Steiner, 2000).
Acknowledging these innate drawbacks of university-centred journalism
training in India, it is imperative that an overhaul is needed not just in terms of
imparting necessary training to journalism educators, but also in formulating a
curricular framework for journalism training considering the challenges raised in
a regime of post-truth.
This should have its priority in emphasizing the role of verification as the
central core of journalistic practice. It may sound obvious, but consider this—the
UGC-formulated model curricula for journalism education in India does not refer
to the word ‘verification’, let alone any mention of a growing body of knowledge
and techniques related to it (UGC, 2001). The actual lessons and practice
of verification reach an average journalism student in India either through
self-initiation or during the initial employment/internship with organizations.
However, this is not just a case of the journalism schools getting it wrong. Even
in the industry, many organizations take a gratuitous approach when it comes to
confirming that their journalists are verifying information from their sources.
Many television channels are notorious in this regard, exhibiting their swaying
allegiance to the growing attention economy over the traditional credibility
economy, in line with the realities of the post-truth era.
Bhaskaran et al. 47

Revisiting Fundamentals: Verification in

Post-truth Era
The need for verification protocols should not be blinded by the overwhelming
technical know-how associated with the growing culture of digital information
forensics seeping into newsrooms. Verification should be rooted in the reality of
human subjectivity rather than being technologically deterministic. While it is
difficult to completely eliminate the influence of personal beliefs, a commitment
to truth and transparency in practice above other subjectivities should help to
improve critical and sceptical thinking in budding journalists.
This is not to say that social media should be ignored by journalists as a
legitimate tool. It is just that verification processes, especially of UGC and other
broadly disseminated material, must be built into its usage, right from the
classroom.
Similarly, there is a need to give more impetus to crowd-sourced, collaborative
approaches which are transparent, be it in collecting information or verifying a
source/information (Hermida, 2012). Crowd-sourcing is already an integral part
of journalistic practice globally (Aitamurto, 2016), though it is very rarely
practiced in an Indian context at present. This approach also brings about the need
to re-engage with the audience and to practice conversational/social journalism in
which it is imperative to get users as partners in news production and consumption
(Singer, 2015, pp. 25–29). This approach is more in line with calls in the US
media to empathize with the disenchanted, mainstream-media hating, non-elite
audiences by re-engaging with them. An emphasis on social engagement through
crowd-sourced, collaborative practices as an integral part of journalism curricula
would obviously help equip journalists for work in the post-truth era.
Another positive step would be for the mainstream media to play a more
proactive role in debunking false claims. It is already done by some organizations,
but it is not yet a regular practice. Unlike the recent US experience, Indian media
organizations retain some public trust, thereby providing a platform from which
this attack on fake news could be launched. Similarly, there is a need for news
organizations, NGOs and academics to support non-profit, crowd-sourced,
de-centralized fact-checking initiatives which can help the promotion of debunking
genre. Such initiatives will help even budding organizations with a shoe-string
budget to stick to verified truth without straining their limited resources.

Conclusion
Perspectives shared in this commentary are more focused on the Indian context
and especially centred around the institutional forces involved in journalism
training in India. This particular approach has its own pitfalls. For instance, the
idea of post-truth itself has been contested (Mantzarlis, 2017). But getting into
48 Asia Pacific Media Educator 27(1)

that debate is beyond the scope of this commentary. Similarly, it assumes that the
primary way to tackle fake news is via an overhaul of academics. However, it falls
short of addressing the issues raised by the race among Indian as well as global
media giants for a share of the untapped, ever-growing pie that is the Indian
smartphone-based media consumer market. This makes the industry more
vulnerable to practices of lie-mongering through clickbaiting to reap the benefits
of the growing attention economy. This situation is worsened by the presence of
political parties trying to make gains through the tactical use of these platforms
for circulating lies and alternative facts.
Admitting these shortcomings, it is vital to point out that any attempts to
formulate a dynamic journalism curriculum should also look at the present
challenges not just as solitary instances raised by a sudden reflection upon the
post-truth era. For instance, a major shock related to the post-truth outcome was
the question of the identity and existence of journalism as professional practice
(see Carlson, 2015, pp. 7–12; Deuze & Witschge, 2017, p. 13).
As journalism educators, it is high time to understand that verification as a
practice is now becoming the site of boundary work for journalism as a profession
(Hermida, 2015). Data journalism is another area where the contours of the
profession are contested and redrawn, primarily because of the presence of active
non-journalists and their contributions. Journalism educators should acknowledge
and comprehend such changing epistemological practices of journalism as well as
the inevitability of engaging the non-journalists in it. While formulating a dynamic
curriculum with an emphasis on the epistemology of new verification practices, it
should be broad enough to include not just journalism students but also the
immediate non-journalist techie and the average social media user.

References
Aitamurto, T. (2016). Crowd sourcing as a knowledge-search method in digital journalism:
Ruptured ideals and blended responsibility. Digital Journalism, 4(2), 280–297.
Bagri, N. (2017). Modi’s success silencing the media in India is a dangerous precedent
for the free press under Trump. Quartz. Retrieved 22 February 2017, from https://
qz.com/894886/trumps-media-policies-look-like-narendra-modis-successful-efforts-
to-silence-the-press-in-india/
BBC News. (2017). The ‘milk miracle’ that brought India to a standstill. Retrieved 22
February 2017, from http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38301718
Bell, E. (2017). Facebook can no longer be ‘I didn’t do it’ boy of global media. Columbia
Journalism Review. Retrieved 22 February 2017, from http://www.cjr.org/tow_center/
facebook_zuckerberg_trump_election.php
Berghel, H. (2017). Lies, damn lies, and fake news. Computer, 50(2), 80–85.
Carlson, M. (2015). Introduction: The many boundaries of journalism. In M. Carlson & S.C.
Lewis (Eds), Boundaries of journalism: Professionalism, practices and participation
(pp. 7–12). NY: Routledge.
dainikbhaskar.com. (2015). Bees saal pahle jab mandiron mein ganeshji ko doodh pilane
keliye umadi thi bheed. Retrieved 22 February 2017, from http://www.bhaskar.com/
news/UT-DEL-HMU-NEW-lord-ganesha-drinking-milk-5115522-PHO.html
Bhaskaran et al. 49
Deuze, M., & Witschge, T. (2017). Beyond journalism: Theorizing the transformation of
journalism. Journalism, 1–17. DOI: 10.1177/1464884916688550
Glasser, S. (2016). Covering politics in a “post-truth” America (1st ed.). Washington, DC:
Brookings Institution Press.
Graves, L., & Cherubini, F. (2016). The rise of fact-checking sites in Europe. Oxford, UK:
Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford.
Hermida, A. (2012). Social journalism: Exploring how social media is shaping journalism.
In E. Siapera & A. Veglis (Eds), The handbook of global online journalism (pp. 309–
28). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
———. (2015). Nothing but the truth: Redrafting the journalistic boundary of verification. In
M. Carlson & S. C. Lewis (Eds), Boundaries of journalism: Professionalism, practices
and participation (pp. 37–47). NY: Routledge.
Mantzarlis, A. (2017). No, we’re not in a ‘post-fact’ era. Poynter. Retrieved 22 February
2017, from http://www.poynter.org/2016/no-were-not-in-a-post-fact-era/421582/
inextlive. (2015). Nandi bhagwan kii moorti pi gayi kai leter doodh—Gorakhpur City
News. Retrieved 22 February 2017, from http://inextlive.jagran.com/nandi-statue-
drinking-milk-85332
Omraam, M. A. (1987). A Philosophy of Universality. Frejus Cadex, France: Editions
Prosveta.
Owen, L. (2017). Clamping down on viral fake news, Facebook partners with sites like
Snopes and adds new user reporting. Nieman Lab. Retrieved 22 February 2017, from
http://www.niemanlab.org/2016/12/clamping-down-on-viral-fake-news-facebook-
partners-with-sites-like-snopes-and-adds-new-user-reporting/
Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. UK: Penguin.
Ross, M. (2017). Newspapers struggling to challenge politicians’ lies, says UK press
regulator. Global Government Forum. Retrieved 1 March 2017, from http://www.
globalgovernmentforum.com/newspapers-struggling-to-challenge-politicians-lies-
says-uk-press-regulator/
Shinde, R. (2017). Currency crunch, chaos, and fake news. The Hoot. Retrieved 22
February 2017, from http://www.thehoot.org/media-watch/media-practice/currency-
crunch-chaos-and-fake-news-9806
Silverman, C. (2017). This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed
real news on Facebook. BuzzFeed. Retrieved 22 February 2017, from https://www.
buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-
facebook?utm_term=.vigPr787V#.orKYpgagR
Silverman, C., & Alexander, L. (2017). How teens in the Balkans are duping Trump
supporters with fake news. BuzzFeed. Retrieved 22 February 2017, from https://www.
buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/how-macedonia-became-a-global-hub-for-pro-trump-
misinfo?utm_term=.xeJ1kK0Kw#.swqE3JyJ1
Singer, J. B. (2015). Out of bounds: Professional norms as boundary markers. In M. Carlson
& S. C. Lewis (Eds), Boundaries of journalism: Professionalism, practices and
participation (pp. 21–36). NY: Routledge.
Soll, J. (2017). The long and brutal history of fake news. POLITICO Magazine. Retrieved
22 February 2017, from http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/fake-news-
history-long-violent-214535
Steiner, L. (2000). Ethics and academic politics. Journalism: Theory, Practice and
Criticism, 1(1), 48–52.
Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Republic.com 2.0. New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press.
50 Asia Pacific Media Educator 27(1)
Tony, H. (2011). Research and reflection. Journalism Practice, 5(1), 161–176. DOI:
10.1080/17512786.2010.493334
UGC. (2001). Report of the curriculum development committee on mass communication
for Indian Universities. Retrieved from http://www.ugc.ac.in/oldpdf/modelcurriculum/
masscomm.pdf
Walk-Morris, T. (2016). The future of fact-checking. Nieman Report Spring 2016, 70(2),
34–35. The Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University.
Ward, S. J. A. (2010). Inventing objectivity: New philosophical foundations. In C. Meyers
(Ed.), Journalism ethics: A philosophical approach (pp. 137–152). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Authors’ bio-sketch
Harikrishnan Bhaskaran is an assistant professor at the Department of Journalism
and Creative Writing, Central University of Himachal Pradesh, India. A journalist
turned academician, Harikrishnan worked with The New Indian Express, Kerala,
as a Staff Correspondent before entering to academics. His teaching interest
includes Journalism Studies, Visual Culture. He has published in international
peer-reviewed journals like Journalism Education, Health and Technology and
popular journals like Mainstream and Vidura.
E-mail: harikrishnanbhaskaran@gmail.com

Harsh Mishra, PhD, is presently working as an assistant professor in the

Department of Journalism and Creative Writing at Central University of Himachal
Pradesh, India. He teaches Advertising and Corporate Communication at post-
graduate level. He has contributed to the peer-reviewed edited volume on Mobile
Governance published by Taylor and Francis. He has published articles in peer-
reviewed journals and in national dailies.
E-mails: mishra.harsh6@gmail.com; harsh@cuhimachal.ac.in

Pradeep Nair, PhD, is an associate professor and dean, School of Journalism,

Mass Communication and New Media (SoJMC&NM) at Central University of
Himachal Pradesh, India. His teaching interests include communication research,
development communication, health governance and critical theory. He has
published in international peer-reviewed journals—Health Management (SAGE),
Asia Pacific Media Educator (SAGE), Journalism Education, Health and
Technology (Springer) and Journal of Comparative Politics, Educational
Technology Development and Exchange and Electronic Governance.
E-mail: nairdevcom@yahoo.co.in