So if we take a picture together we're friends. Let's post it on Instagram so people will believe us. Dailymail clearly believed in it. And by putting it as a headline with that photo, they want you to believe it too.
British locals will be familiar with this
website. It is also labelled as "trashy" and “sensationalist”; seems like it ticks all the boxes of what we may think as an
unreliable news source. Yet, statistics says otherwise; it has a jaw dropping
100 million unique views per month. One may argue that they may view it for
entertainment value. Sure enough, there’s more celebrity gossip than real local
and international news in there. However, despite the knowledge that they are
trash, many do return to the website and buy what they report and what they
claim. Why?
Just by using very basic news reporting
technique – the use of pictures. We are visual animals and pictures are great.
They give us evidence, reducing our cognitive effort to understand and receive
information. If information is salient to us we’ll accept it, we believe in
it. But if you take a closer look at
each picture in relation to the claims, some just simply do not make
sense. Take for example:
Dailymail's more serious side: reporting on a scientific study
Does that picture tell you the difference between the two different diets? I guess not.
What about America’s
most trustworthy CNN?
I can see water but can anyone see the New York Stock Exchange in the picture? Viewers actually believed in it for a period of time before it was reported to be untrue.
These
visual images are crucial in presenting news that generate media profit. News reporters
make use of what is called the truthiness effect, where photos are used to bias
masses to believe their claims are true. A study by Newman et al. (2012) and was
able to prove this effect where they found that non-probative photographs
inflate truthiness. They had subjects to judge whether the trivia claims they
were given to be true or false. Half of these trivia claims had photographs
accompanying them. Also, these trivia statements were also either difficult or
easy. This makes 4 conditions in their study:
a) Easy
claims with photographs
b)
Easy claims without photographs
c)
Difficult claims with photographs
d)
Difficult claims without photographs
True
enough, the results were consistent with their hypothesis that subjects were
more likely to think a claim is true when presented with a photograph as
compared to single statements. Moreover, the more difficult and unfamiliar the
claim is, the higher the chances where people will think the statement is true. To prove this claim, the graph below will serve as visual evidence.
Figure 1. Bias for easy and difficult
trivia statements presented with or without a photograph.
These
photos are non-probative, so technically, they should not affect your
judgements. So why does this occur? It is probably because pictures provide
some form of “pseudoevidence”. We are unable to prove new information and the
only evidence you seem to have is that relatively relevant picture in front of
you. We fall for this confirmation bias and interpret this unknown information
as true. Cognitively, we tend to believe things that are salient to us, which
are essentially the photographs. This will also bolster our initial judgement
that the claim is true.
The
power of visuals to convince can take place anywhere, even in legal judgements.
Imagine what effect it could have on jurors who were presented with
non-probative photographs of a fMRI image or a diagram of a brain in relation to a defendant’s medical
condition. The juror might reduce damages to the victim or find the
defendant innocent. Scary isn't it?
Hopefully we don't find ourselves in courtrooms. But news are still the most
relevant scenario we face where truthiness can occur. News are called news
because they are new information to us. We can only trust them through what
sources they give us at that moment in time, which are pictures. There is a
reason why we are constantly reminded not to judge a book by it’s cover. Or if
you are going to venture into journalism, and you haven’t got hard evidence to
prove your claim, use related photos. Chances are, your viewers will probably believe you.
Reference: Newman, E. J., Garry, M., Bernstein, D. M., Kantner, J., & Lindsay, D. S. (2012). Nonprobative photographs (or words) inflate truthiness. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 19(5), 969–974
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.