Protests are currently a threat to public health
A couple of hundred people on the waterfront compared to the total number of Latvian residents or, for example, the number of residents wearing masks, is of course nothing, but it clearly shows how false information spread on social networks can pose a threat to society. Taking into account the comments of infectious disease experts about the possible spread of the virus directly under the influence of the protests, it can indeed be considered a threat, since most likely a large part of the event participants who did not wear masks then went home, met other people, went to work or took public transport.
Trust in traditional media
Observing the development of the event, we can conclude that the theories advocated by the event participants are actively being spread on social networks, as is the call to gather. This clearly confirms that the times when we received information only through traditional media are over. Social media has an increasing influence, but, unfortunately, it also brings with it greater risks and opportunities for fake news. Fortunately, there are some positive features, for example, the Eurobarometer study (Standard Eurobarometer 92) on public opinion in the European Union in 2019 showed that Latvian society trusts print media, radio and TV more than social networks. Namely, 48% of respondents trust print media, 65% trust radio, 63% trust TV, 34% trust online media, and 22% trust social media. In addition, if we compare 2018 and 2019, we can conclude that trust in traditional media has increased slightly, for example, print media was trusted by 36% in 2018, radio by 62%, and TV by 58%. Social media was trusted by 21% in 2018, which is a 1% increase over the year.
Manipulating public fatigue
It is clearly visible that populists are currently actively using social networks to implement their plans, goals, and needs on the wave of pandemic fatigue and public despair. This tool provides an opportunity to manipulate a part of society, which is what is being done. The events on the waterfront were a vivid example. How many of the people on the waterfront have personally talked about the virus with a certified doctor, scientist or researcher? How many have talked to someone who is currently working with the sick?
Share true information
Although the classic media is currently actively explaining various myths and dispelling false information, as the situation becomes more critical, it may not be enough. A good example is the Center for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC), which is currently actively explaining half-truths and myths about the spread of the virus on social media. Such campaigns are definitely necessary and should be supported. If we – users – sometimes tend to spread false news, even without realizing it, then we can also spread explanations and the truth – all we need is the original source of information, which in this case is CDC.
30 minutes of true news
Despite the fact that many are tired of the restrictions and we want to meet other people, continue working and studying in person, we must not lose vigilance. Fatigue does not exempt us from responsibility! We must be critical and carefully evaluate any information we receive. None of us wants to be manipulated. Then let’s not let it happen and promote life in a world of true and verified information. No matter how busy we are, everyone can find at least 30 minutes a day to watch the evening news in one of the major media. This will provide, albeit a small, but still insight into processes and facts, allowing us to be more critical of what we see on social media.
Jana Bunkus, Head of Communication Field at Turība University
