Test Your Fake News Savvy by Playing “Bad News” Game

My 13-year-old son is pretty savvy for his age, but nonetheless believes some pretty outlandish stories he uncovers online. He recently shared with me one of these far-fetched tales and when I asked his source, he grinned sheepishly and said, “Someone I trust.” To which I responded, “Uh-huh...Tick Tock,” and then launched into my predictable spiel about why this might not be the most trustworthy source, how he must critically think for himself, how he could verify such information, and so forth. 

But I recently learned — maybe I’m a little slow? — that this isn’t very helpful. I used to think the most effective way to show people their belief in disinformation was to first empathize with their position, then counter with my position, using supporting facts and information. Point them to a certain article from a reputable news or direct them to Snopes, and they’d eventually see the light. Yet people rarely change their minds once disinformation is seeded, despite being presented with new and contradicting facts. 

Instead, I learned that a more effective way to persuade others is to “prebunk” disinformation by inoculating them before it ever takes hold in their brains.

Enter “Bad News,” www.getbadnews.com, a fascinating and fun online game that takes about 15 minutes to play. It was created by DROG, a multidisciplinary team of academics, journalists and media experts from Europe and headquartered in The Hague. The goal is to build resistance to disinformation.

The game's creators believe that by exposing people to a small dose of the “virus,” the game works like a vaccine, equipping the brain to better stave off manipulation tactics. 

A player is awarded six badges for mastering use of the following fake news manipulation tactics: 

Emotion - Playing to people’s emotions (fear, anger or compassion) is a great tool for spreading a message, having it go viral. 

Conspiracy - Using people’s desire for the “truth” lures them into your band of followers. 

Impersonation - Impersonating someone else and disguising yourself as a credible news source (i.e. an editor-in-chief with no journalism credentials) can be highly effective.

Trolling - Trolling is trying to evoke an emotional response such as anger, irritation or sadness.

Discrediting - Is someone attacking your credibility? Strike back. Don’t apologize, don’t play nice and don’t retreat.

Polarization - By finding existing grievances and blowing them up, you drive people apart and make them think a story is more important than it is.

After playing "Bad News," I was surprised how much I learned about these tactics and understand better now the predictable framework that drives them. 

It also made me more curious about the role those in the marketing profession, including myself, play in leading people towards or away from certain ideas and products that have potential for great harm — and for great good. 

It left me asking more questions about how communication professionals can double-down on our commitments to truth-telling — holding our audiences with reverence and care. How can we can use our influence to spread truth and light and unity? How can and when can we justify short-term strategies that offer quick-hits and viral attention, yet can contribute to further polarization and distrust in our society?

How can those of us charged with communicating, marketing and promoting for an organization avoid getting sucked into the use of any manipulation tactics, demonstrated in "Bad News," that may offer some temporary persuasion benefits, but gradually degrade the threads of unity our democracy depends upon?