Williams 1

Mericlaire Williams

Professor Griffin Rowe

R C 2001 - 109

4 February 2019

Two Takes on the Fake News Crisis

Being told we cannot trust the media will eventually affect how multimedia websites

operate. Distrust in the media is a highly debated issue on mediums from post on Facebook to

news reporters on television. Both Jim Macnamara, from the University of Technology in

Sydney, and John Herrman, reporter for The New York Times, have debated the issue of

misinformation in the multimedia world. If no one trusts sources to give out news, no one is

buying into this industry, and therefore jobs like journalism, public relations, and advertising are

in trouble. With both articles discussing the same topic, one focuses on the internal ethical

malpractices of the communications industry while the other is more entertaining and opinion-

based. Both authors use ethos, audience, and logos to write about a similar issue surrounding the

communications field.

Jim Macnamara, author of “Public Relations and the Social: How Practitioners are Using, or

Abusing, Social Media,” builds his ethos by describing different studies about the shift of the

public relations field. Macnamara goes into the history of “PR 2.0,” a concept that started with the

changing of social media. Through knowledge of this history, he is able to understand the

Williams 2
evolution of public relations and social media that has created an epidemic of unreliable news.

Macnamara explains the engagement of social media through the two-way symmetrical model of

communication, which is the reason the public relations field is unbalanced (22). Macnamara's

explanation of the communications field is far different of John Herrman’s, New York Times

article, which is explained from a political perspective. Herrman uses ethos by establishing his

insertion in the journalism world but distinguishes himself from the money hungry journalists

who feed off fake news. In the second paragraph he is quick to state, “Fake news is created by the

kinds of people who, when asked, might call their work satire, or admit they’re in it for the

money.” He establishes credibility by quickly acknowledging deception in his field of work and

scolding it. Credibility continues to be established when he “recalls his conversation with a fact

checker (Herrman 6).” He relays personal experiences in his investigative process. This insight

shows the dedication in setting himself apart from the journalists he is critiquing. While he

definitely has bias and a clear agenda by writing this article, he is still able to provide accuracy for

the readers. Herrman not only gains trusts from his professional experience but also on a personal

level by relating to the effects of fake news. Herrman uses first person language and his opinion

on his observations to explain the deception in the media. Both contain vast knowledge on the

effect of false news in the realm of social media but get their information from different

observations. Herrman is a journalist and reports on the business sector, while Macnamara is a

professor of public communications. Macnamara’s approach to ethos is showing his academic

understandings. In his essay, Macnamara uses theories and models that give the reader a better

inside scope on how the communications field functions. He works on answering the questions of

Williams 3
how the media has turned haywire. Both pieces use primary sources, with statistics and quotes,

that helps establish their credibility despite using data in their argument differently.

The two pieces of work are intended for two different audiences, therefore changes in word

choice and how the reader is approached are made. Macnamara’s piece on the abuse of social

media is meant as an educational piece, reflected in his terminology. He does not use simplified

terms but instead academic meanings. His use of professional terminology requires a previous

understanding of the words, or a desire to learn the meanings, therefore the reading is meant to be

informational. He uses terms and empirical data used by other scholars and compares them to one

another, which induces the reader to analyze. Words like “astro-turfing” and “e-democracy” are

used, which makes it challenging to comprehend if lacking academic background on the subjects,

and it is expected of the readers to understand his terminology to fully understand his claim. He is

approaching the readers with a serious tone and makes it clear the journal is not meant for

entertainment. However Hermann’s article approaches the reader with a mix of entertainment and

persuasion. His lack of statistics and use of first-person language indicates there is a clear bias

behind his article and research. As a journalist himself, he is addressing the reader and trying to

win their trust back in the media. The persuasive element comes from the personal attachment he

has to the media and how he will be affected if there is mistrust in the media. Herrman will

experience a direct impact to his career if people do not trust the media, so he uses persuasion to

display his argument. Hermann uses strong word choice like “disingenuous” and “horrifying” to

connect with the reader and publicly shun misleading articles as a form a persuasion. Another

example of connecting himself to reader is his commentary on examples he provides of the fake

news frenzy. He comments that one story was

 Williams 4

“sinister” and “appealed to bigoted ideas.” With these statements he is implying his empathy for

the people affected by the false news spread around facebook.

Macnamara and Herrman are discussing the same topic but take the argument in different

directions because of the evidence they provide. Macnamara’s logos comes by laying out his

research and sites each source to supply extended knowledge on any topic the reader would like

to know more about. He emphasizes key terms throughout his journal through repetition and

italicization. Macnamara use of terms like “excellence theory” and “dialogic model” are put in

italics to hint the importance of understanding the terms to get a clearer idea of his argument. He

only used one chart in the journal, to show the comparison of how important social media is and

how important it should be. He displayed all his other statistics in writing, so the contrast shows

the value of the poll to the reader. Herrman puts his information in displays of current events; he

discusses trouble Facebook has been getting into and comments by President Donald Trump. In

the case of fake pro-Trump stories being posted around on facebook, Herrman discusses how

Trump would throw back critiques at his critics. Stories like this present his information on

current events more informally which allows the reader to have a stronger connection to his

words. He uses a more casual approach to the reader and accusatory language toward Facebook.

Herrman states, “the company that created the system that resulted in hoax news stories should try

to eliminate them, and with any luck it will (17).” The author uses language that relates to the

reader, that they have a shared connection of being affected by hoax new stories.

Williams 5
 Both authors have personal insight in the communications field they are reporting on, but

their reasons for writing vary. Both texts acknowledge there is an issue of deception in the

multimedia world. Macnamara presents theories and statistics that help argue his solution to

how corrupt social media use should be handled. He addresses the readers in a serious tone to

provide information useful in cleaning up the communications industry from the inside.

Herrman uses emotions, entertainment, and persuasion to display his argument and connect to

the reader.

During the crisis of fake news no one can accurately explain what affect this will have long term.

Yet two educated active members of the Communications field approach the debate as a warning,

Their warnings come in two forms to reach different audiences to spark different discussions.

Macnamara hopes to reach scholars in his field to educate the mass, while Herrman reaches out to

the general population. Herrman works to restore the credibility of a journalist by separating his

work from the faulty work of journalists contributing to the crisis.

 Bibliography

Herrman, John. “Fixation on Fake News Overshadows Waning Trust in Real Reporting.” The

New York Times. The New York Times Company. 18 Nov. 2016.

Macnamara, Jim. “ Public relations and the social: how practitioners are using, or abusing social

media.” Deakin School of Communication and Creative Arts. Asia Pacific Public

Relations Journal, 12 Aug. 2010.