Between Blind Trust and Total Distrust: Navigating Fake News in a Polarised World
- Renee Spencer
- 3 days ago
- 3 min read
PART 4 OF 4
We are living in an era where everyone claims someone else is lying.
Traditional media is accused of propaganda. Independent journalists are accused of bias. Academics are dismissed as “captured.” Fact-checkers are labelled partisan. And into that confusion steps a dangerous conclusion: if mainstream sources can’t be trusted, then alternative voices must be more truthful.
That assumption is understandable — but it’s also deeply flawed.
The truth is far more nuanced, and navigating it requires more critical thinking than ever before.
When Distrust Becomes a Weapon
Traditional news outlets are not perfect. They are influenced by commercial pressures, political access, time constraints, and sometimes genuine blind spots. Mistakes happen. Framing choices matter. And historically, there have been moments where media institutions failed the public.
But recognising those failures is not the same as abandoning all standards of evidence.
What we are increasingly seeing instead is a polarised epistemology:
If it comes from “mainstream media,” it must be false.
If it comes from a fringe source, influencer, or anonymous account, it must be brave truth-telling.
This binary thinking is exactly where fake news thrives.
The False Choice: Establishment vs “Truth Tellers”
Reality does not operate in absolutes. Credible information exists across a spectrum:
Some mainstream reporting is careful, evidence-based, and ethical.
Some independent journalism is rigorous and vital.
Some alternative sources raise legitimate critiques.
And some voices — loud, confident, emotionally charged — are simply wrong.
The problem is that confidence now masquerades as credibility, and outrage is mistaken for insight.
When people lose trust in institutions entirely, they don’t become free thinkers — they become easier to manipulate.
Why Fake News Feels So Convincing
Fake news doesn’t usually look absurd. It looks plausible. It often:
contains partial truths,
exploits real grievances,
frames itself as “what they don’t want you to know,”
and positions the audience as enlightened for believing it.
Psychologically, this is powerful.
It taps into the same mechanisms we see in coercive control:
Domination: “Everyone else is lying — only I tell the truth.”
Deception: selective facts, missing context, fabricated certainty.
Manipulation: emotional hooks designed to bypass rational scrutiny.
Identity capture: believing the narrative becomes part of who you are.
Once identity is involved, evidence becomes threatening rather than informative.
Narcissism, Power, and the Performance of Truth
It’s also important to name the personality dynamics behind persistent untruthfulness.
Many prolific misinformation spreaders display traits consistent with narcissistic patterns:
grandiosity (“I see what others can’t”),
lack of accountability,
contempt for expertise,
exploitation of others’ fear or loyalty,
and a constant need for attention and validation.
Truth, for these individuals, is not about accuracy — it’s about control, dominance, and audience capture.
This is why corrections rarely work. Admitting error would threaten their self-image and authority.
Recognising the Myth of the Perfect Source When Navigating Fake News
There is no single source that is always right.
There never has been.
Truth emerges through:
corroboration,
transparency,
expertise,
willingness to correct errors,
and alignment with observable reality.
That means we must move beyond source worship — whether mainstream or alternative — and toward critical evaluation. Navigating fake news means being open to questioning all sources of information.
Critical Thinking and “Competent Googling”
Critical thinking today isn’t just about skepticism — it’s about skill.
Competent googling includes:
checking multiple reputable sources,
distinguishing reporting from opinion,
identifying primary vs secondary sources,
understanding incentives (who benefits if this is believed?),
and recognising emotionally manipulative language.
If a claim relies on outrage, secrecy, or instant certainty — pause.
If it discourages verification — pause.
If it frames disagreement as proof of persecution — pause.
Holding Complexity Without Collapsing Into Cynicism
Rejecting fake news does not mean blindly trusting institutions.
Questioning authority does not require abandoning evidence.
And skepticism does not justify believing anything that feels emotionally satisfying.
We can hold complexity without collapsing into cynicism.
In fact, democracy, justice, and social cohesion depend on that ability.
Conclusion: Truth Is a Practice, Not a Tribe
Truth is not owned by a political side, a platform, or a personality.
It is a practice — one that requires humility, patience, and responsibility.
In a world saturated with manipulation, the most radical act is not outrage or certainty, but discernment.
Critical thinking has never been more necessary.
Psychological literacy has never mattered more.
And truth — real truth — has never needed such careful tending.
Comments