Yeshua Explored
13th March 2023
Fake News
What is truth … and is it important?
So we can see that Fake News is far more sinister than the mischievous mis-information we encounter today revolving around the lives of celebrities, politicians and basically anyone in the public eye.
Of course, Fake News cuts no ice with God, who sees everything and acts accordingly. But does this Commandment actually mean what it says on the tin? What is the literal reading of the Hebrew words?
Although we translate the passage as no false testimony, the more literal translation is no answering or repeating. It focusses not just at the point of embarkation of the gossip grapevine, but at all points thereafter! It is an injunction against hearsay, it is the repeating of the story that is frowned upon. The thinking is that the subject of the gossip may actually be true, but, unless you were an actual primary witness, you are indulging in hearsay. So, attempting to unpack the scope of this commandment, giving false testimony or propagating Fake News is bad enough, but also is the repeating of the testimony of others, or gossiping is also bad. So, no lying and no gossiping … even if I had it on the best authority …
If the broader interpretation is correct then most of our News media has been rendered unacceptable. When reporting on any event, only verifiable eye-witness accounts can be used, all opinion and commentary are to be discounted. It’s not just a case of whether the news is fake or real, it’s also a matter of whether there are witnesses to it. Here’s an example of the importance of such a principal:
In April 2002 the media was in a frenzy about the “Jenin Massacre” in Israel, with news reports from such as the BBC and the Guardian, presenting such headlines as Jenin ‘massacre evidence growing’ and clear reporting of a massacre by Israeli forces. A month later, to their credit, the Guardian had this to say:
“Despite flimsy evidence British papers jumped the gun to apportion blame when a West Bank refugee camp was attacked, says Sharon Sadeh. As a result, the reputation of the press has been damaged … The battle of Jenin was indisputably fierce and bloody. But while the British papers, almost unanimously, presented it from the outset as a “massacre” or at least as an intentional “war crime” of the worst kind, the US and Israeli papers – Ha’aretz included – were far more reserved and cautious, saying that there was no evidence to back such claims. The left-liberal press in Britain thought differently. The Independent, the Guardian and the Times, in particular, were quick to denounce Israel and made sensational accusations based on thin evidence, fitting a widely held stereotype of a defiant, brutal and don’t-give-a-damn Israel.”
Apparently one of the drivers for the original emotive reporting by the Times, Telegraph and Guardian, was the obviously flawed testimony of a single individual, Kamal Anis, who claimed to witness Israeli war crimes. The reporters, in a clear dereliction of the independence required in war journalism, heard and believed what they wanted to hear and believe. The Guardian article continues:
“Selective use of details or information and occasional reliance on unsubstantiated accounts inflict considerable damage on the reputation of the entire British press, and more importantly, do a disservice to its readers. The US media, especially the press, were wilfully oblivious, prior to the September 11 attacks, to the issues which might have captured more accurately and profoundly the realities regarding the Middle East and the Muslim world, and the appropriate way of approaching and handling them. Are the British media in a similar state of self-denial?”
In this case the news story came from a single witness, who was lying through his teeth. The British press fed from this, added their own colour to the story and ended up with Fake News. But it also shows us a sad reality regarding the information that is fed to us through the numerous media channels available. Everything is ‘editorialised’ or spun, in accordance with the politics, religion, philosophy or lifestyle of the people channelling the information. It seems that most of us are too deadened to the truth to care and, in fact, most of us would seek out our news sources from those whose politics / religion / philosophy / lifestyle we agree with. Where does the absolute truth fit in here? Well, except in clear cut cases where facts are impervious to spin, such as natural disasters, the absolute truth will only be found in sources that actually believe in the absolute truth. I rest my case here.
You shall not give false testimony. As we saw with the previous three Commandments, there is said to be an equivalence between this Ninth Commandment and the Fourth Commandment, regarding the keeping of the Sabbath. Here is the thinking. The Sabbath is a day when Israel testifies that God created the Earth, so whoever desecrates the Sabbath denies the truth of this testimony and bears false witness to the Works of God. If this is so then the Church has a lot to answer for both by moving the Sabbath to a Sunday and also by denying the literal six days of Creation. Can it be bearing a false witness? A serious statement has been made here, one that affects everyone who identifies with the Church.
Here is how the Sinner’s Charter could interpret this ninth Commandment:
Fake News is indeed the scourge of our times but sometimes we need to follow the narrative and take into account different interpretations of an event. Nothing is ever black and white, truth is an ever-moving target, it is not an absolute.
This is an extract from the book, Sinner’s Charter: Are the ten commandments for today?, available for £10 at https://www.sppublishing.com/the-sinners-charter-260-p.asp
