As the world of social media expands, the ratio of miscommunication rises as more organisations hop on the bandwagon of utilising the digital realm to their advantage. Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, online forums and other websites become the pinnacle of news gathering for many individuals. Information becomes easily accessible to all walks of life meaning that people are becoming more integrated about real life issues. Consumers absorb and take information in as easy as ever before which proves to be equally advantageous and disadvantageous. But, There is an evident boundary in which the differentiation of misleading and truthful information is hard to cross without research on the topic. The accuracy of public information is highly questionable which could easily lead to problems. Despite there being a debate about source credibility in any platform, there are ways to tackle the issue through “expertise/competence (i. e., the degree to which a perceiver believes a sender to know the truth), trustworthiness (i. e., the degree to which a perceiver believes a sender will tell the truth as he or she knows it), and goodwill”. (Cronkhite & Liska (1976)) Which is why it has become critical for this to be accurate, ethical and reliable for the consumers. Verifying information is important regardless of the type of social media outlet. This essay will be highlighting the importance of why information need to fit this criteria.
By putting out credible information it prevents and reduces misconception, convoluted meanings and inconsistent facts which reduce the likeliness of issues surfacing. This in turn saves time for the consumer and the producer. The presence of risk raises the issue of how much of this information should be consumed by the public. The perception of source credibility becomes an important concept to analyse within social media, especially in terms of crisis where rationality reduces and the latter often just take the first thing that is seen. With the increasing amount of information available through newer channels, the idea of releasing information from professionals of the topic devolve away from the producers and onto consumers. (Haas & Wearden, 2003) Many of the public is unaware that this information is prone to bias and selective information sharing which could communicate the actual facts much differently. One such example is the incident of Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s Fukushima No.1 nuclear power plant in 2011, where the plant experienced triple meltdowns. There is a misconception floating around that the food exported from Fukushima is too contaminated with radioactive substances making them unhealthy and unfit to eat. But the truth is that this isn’t the case when strict screening reveals that the contamination is below the government standard to pose a threat. (arkansa.gov.au) Since then, products shipped from Fukushima have dropped considerably in prices and have not recovered since 2011 forcing retailers into bankruptcy. (japantimes.co.jp) But thanks to the use of social media and organisations releasing information out into the public, Fukushima was able to raise funds and receive help from other countries. For example the U.S. sending $100,000 and China sending emergency supplies as assistance. (theguardian.com) This would have been impossible to achieve without the use of sharing credible, reliable and ethical information regarding the country and social media support spotlighting the incident.
Accurate, ethical and reliable information open the pathway for producers to secure a relationship with the consumers which can be used to strengthen their own businesses and expand their industries further whilst gaining support from the public. The idea is to have a healthy relationship without the air of uneasiness where monetary gains and social earnings increase. Social media playing a pivotal role in deciding the route the relationship falls in. But, When done incorrectly, organisations can become unsuccessful when they know little to nothing about the change of dynamics in consumers and behaviour in the digital landscape. Consumer informedness means that consumers are well informed about products or services available with precision influencing their willingness in decisions. This increase in consumer informedness can instigate change in consumer behaviour. (uni-osnabrueck.de) In the absence of accurate, ethical and reliable information, people and organisations will make terrible decisions with no hesitation. Which leads to losses and steps backwards. As Saul Eslake (Saul-Eslake.com) says, “they will be unable to help or persuade others to make better decisions; and no-one will be able to ascertain whether the decisions made by particular individuals or organisations were the best ones that could have been made at the time”. Recently, a YouTuber named Shawn Dawson made a video that sparked controversy to the company ‘Chuck E. Cheese’ for their pizzas slices that do not look like they belong to the whole pizza. He created a theory that part of the pizzas may have been reheated or recycled from other tables. In response Chuck E. Cheese responded in multiple media outlets to debunk the theory, “These claims are unequivocally false. We prep the dough daily for our made to order pizzas, which means they’re not always perfectly round, but they are still great tasting.” (https://twitter.com/chuckecheeses) It is worth bringing up that no information other than pictures back up the claim that they reused the pizza. The food company has also gone far to create a video showing the pizza preparation. To back as the support, ex-employees spoke up and shared their own side of the story to debunk the theory further. It’s these quick responses that saved what could have caused a small downfall in sale for the Chuck E. Cheese company. (washintonpost.com) This event highlights the importance on the release of information that can fall in favour to whoever utilises it correctly and the effectiveness of credible information that should be taken to heart. Credible information is good and bad especially when it has the support of others whether online or real life. The assumption or guess when there is no information available to base from is called a ‘heuristic value’ which is seen associated with information that has no credibility.
Mass media have been a dominant source of finding information (Murch, 1971). They are generally thought and assumed to provide credible, valuable, and ethical information open to the public (Heath, Liao, & Douglas, 1995). However, along with traditional forms of media, newer media are increasingly available for information seeking and reports. According to PNAS (www.pnas.org), “The emergence of social media as a key source of news content has created a new ecosystem for the spreading of misinformation. This is illustrated by the recent rise of an old form of misinformation: blatantly false news stories that are presented as if they are legitimate . So-called “fake news” rose to prominence as a major issue during the 2016 US presidential election and continues to draw significant attention.” This affects how we as social beings perceive and analyse information we see online compared to real life. Beyond just reducing the intervention’s effectiveness, failing to deduce stories from real to false increase the belief of false content. Leading to biased and misleading content that fool the audience. One such incident is Michael Jackson’s death in June 2009 where he died from acute propofol and benzodiazepine intoxication administered by his doctor, Dr. Murray. (nytimes.com) It was deduced from the public that Michael Jackson was murdered on purpose but the court convicted, Dr. Murray of involuntary murder as the doctor proclaimed that Jackson begged him to give more. A fact that was overlooked by the general due to bias. This underlines how information is selectively picked from the public and not all information is revealed to sway the audience. A study conducted online by Jason and his team (JCMC [CQU]) revealed that Facebook users tended to believe their friends almost instantly even without a link or proper citation to a website to backup their claim. “Using a person who has frequent social media interactions with the participant was intended to increase the external validity of the manipulation.” Meaning information online that can be taken as truth or not is left to the perception of the viewer linking to the idea that information online isn’t credible fully unless it came straight from the source. Proclaiming the importance of credible information to be released.
Information has the power to inform, explain and expand on topics and concepts. But it also has the power to create inaccuracies and confusion which is hurtful to the public and damages the reputation of companies. The goal is to move forward not backwards. Many companies have gotten themselves into disputes because of incorrect information which could have easily been avoided through releasing accurate, ethical and reliable information from the beginning. False Information can start disputes and true information can provide resolution. The public has become less attentive to mainstream news altogether which strikes a problem on what can be trusted. Companies and organisations need their information to be accurate and reliable as much as possible to defeat and reduce this issue. Increased negativity and incivility exacerbate the media’s credibility problem. “People of all political persuasions are growing more dissatisfied with the news, as levels of media trust decline.” (JCMC [CQU]) In 2010, Dannon’s ‘Activia Yogurt’ released an online statement and false advertisement that their yogurt had “special bacterial ingredients.” A consumer named, Trish Wiener lodged a complaint against Dannon. The yogurts were being marketed as being “clinically” and “scientifically” proven to boost the immune system while able to help to regulate digestion. However, the judge saw this statement as unproven. As well as many other products in their line that used this statement in their products. “This landed the company a $45 million class action settlement.” (businessinsider.com) it didn’t help that Dannon’s prices for their yogurt was inflated compared to other yogurts in the market. “The lawsuit claims Dannon has spent “far more than $100 million” to convey deceptive messages to U.S. consumers while charging 30 percent more that other yogurt products.” (reuters.com) This highlights how inaccurate information can cost millions of dollars to settle and resolve. However it also showed how the public can easily evict irresponsible producers from their actions and give leeway to justice.
2019-5-2-1556794982