STUDY 1: WEB OBSERVATION
4.1 Web-Observation Results
4.1.3 Disaster Social Tragedy False information: Baby Adoption
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
in expressing their opinions compared to the first two cases and utilized social media features such as share, tag, and comment buttons to further spread their belief.
4.1.3 Disaster Social Tragedy False information: Baby Adoption
The last type of false information observed was related false information about social tragedies occurred as a result of the disaster. Cases involved in this category include information pertaining to humanity or emotions about the societal damages. A chosen case was a case on baby adoption was selected not only because the information went viral, but also misused a person’s name and a refugee center who had nothing to do with this case. Furthermore, there were also concerns about children abuse and potentials for child trafficking.
The occurrence of this fake news took place after October 2, 2018, when the Ministry of Communication and Information published a press release to debunk eight fake news post-Palu disaster. This fake news started to emerge on October 5, 2018 and was circulated on Facebook and WhatsApp. The message claimed that there were more than 100 orphan babies who were ready to be adopted, while including a specific location, and a person’s name and contact number.
Figure 7 is a graph from Google Trend that depicts the information volume for this case by searching from the most relevant keyword “adopsi bayi Palu” (adopting babies from Palu).
Results showed some similarities with occurring events, search volume reached its first and highest peak on October 5, 2018, and this is when information about baby adoption started to emerge and proliferate. For example, a social media user expressed, “I don’t know if it’s a hoax or the truth, I am just sharing (this information) to help.” Observation showed that many users expressed their uncertainty on this information yet some still expressed their willingness to adopt.
By October 6, 2018, search volume for baby adoption started to plummet as news and fact-checking media started to debunk this fake news. Upon further observation, two other minor peaks
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
on October 14 and 18, 2018 showed no relevant connection with this case. There were no offline or online events that were related to this case. Observation on social media showed that some people were reposting posts to clarify that no adoption is taking place.
The government does not publish any press release or statement related to this fake news.
Compared to the aftershock case, news media started to report about this issue beginning from October 5, 2018, to around October 9, 2018. News media sourced their information from people such as local officials and the Commission for the Protection of Children Indonesia (KPAI) to clarify that the information is misleading as there was no adoption.
Kompas.com provided several articles about this issue and observation shows that each article has slightly different tones. Some articles directly debunk this fake news and provided the
Oct 6: Information volume decreased
News and fact-check media debunked this information Oct 5: Information
about baby adoption emerged
Figure 7. Information Volume for Baby Adoption Case (Google Trend, 2019)
‧
addressed about children and babies in Palu that were separated from their parents and what the government will do to help them. Interestingly, the news organization Medcom.id does not address this issue, observation from their news websites yielded no result on this case.Tempo.co took a similar approach as Kompas.com, in which they debunked this fake news and published several articles about this issue. In addition, they included further information about some reasons why children and babies could be misunderstood as parentless, such as in situations where children couldn’t speak or answer the questions properly. Tempo.co explained that the process of the adoption is not as simple as posting adoptions on social media. The media further clarified that in case a child becomes an orphan, the first group of people who had the right to adopt them would be their relatives. Table 9 summarizes the publication activities of the three categories of news media. It highlights some of the major similarities and differences between each news media organization.
Table 9. News Media and Baby Adoption News media
‧
considered as fake news, (2) current condition of the babies and children, and (3) impact of this fake news in which hundreds of people went to the shelter to adopt these babies and children.News media not only debunked this fake news but also reminded the public to be mindful of this fake news. Compared to the two previous fake news cases, the government doesn’t publish any press release or statements about this fake news, this includes related institutions to children’s welfare.
Likewise, Mafindo, the third-party fact-checking organization, also published about this case. However, the person who published the clarification is a user of Mafindo’s Facebook forum who was regulated by Mafindo. Using the predetermined format by Mafindo (e.g. attach references and screenshots), the user posted information to debunk this fake news. The post was shared 82 times and up to the observation date, received 10 comments; most people criticized producer of this fake news, while another user stated “this (fake news) had been widely circulated on WhatsApp,” confirming that this chain message was indeed viral.
Overall, the public expressed sympathy towards the babies and some even expressed their willingness to adopt, and a lot of people even mentioned the preferred age and gender of the child.
However, there were some people who reminded that this information could’ve been a fake news.
Furthermore, another interesting observation indicated that people were also involved in clarifying
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
this fake news. As observed, a person went on to contact the number mentioned on the fake news narrative and the reply received was an expression of frustration from the contact person as her personal number had been abused. The result of their conversation was then posted on social media while warning the viral information (baby adoption) was indeed fake news.
To conclude this case, the disaster social tragedy nature of this case is completely different from the first case regarding disaster threat false information. The public also reacted differently with most being emotionally invested with the idea that there were people who created fake news about children and babies who are victims of a natural disaster. By October 5, 2018, the chain message became viral resulting in many people took actions by posting it on social media, and even expressing their desire to adopt. To address this fake news, news media and third-party fact-checking organization also took actions in providing clarification and updates about the case.
Unlike the first case on aftershock, the government does not publish any press release or any content to debunk this fake news but officials were interviewed by news media to speak about this matter.