There are too many information senders. If it is the exact fact, anyone can say.

On the other hand, the confusing thing is that the number of “senders” has exploded in the age of the Internet. In addition, they claim that they have “predominance” that many say. In some cases, “parties” and “witnesses” may claim to be sending information directly. Some have argued that literacy is high, such as “experts” and “researchers”. However, many of them are “self-proclaimed”, so we don’t know what to trust. We have to check it ourselves. How should this problem be solved?

In the old media era, the number of people who can transmit information in mass media was limited. A company employee based on a lifetime employment system that belongs to a mass media company such as newspaper, television, radio, and publishing company. Scholars, researchers, lawyers, critics, novelists, etc. who are given a chance to speak to such mass media. It was “professional speechist” who is a profession to say in mass media in all. Mainly “high literacy layer”. On the other hand, there were actors, singers, musicians, talents, and etc. who can appear in mass media by “popularity” and “notice”.

Mass media companies acted as gatekeepers to select “senders”. “You can trust this person on the premise that it is a fact,” they promised to readers and viewers. They screened the credibility. As expected, publishers and newspapers have secured the credibility of senders as “organizations”. So, even now, when a weekly magazine article or TV show is accused of defamation, publishers and television stations will be sued with the author. The responsibility of such mass media companies and organizations is called “editing responsibility”.

In addition, human resources (actors, singers, musicians, talents, and etc.) who say, “This person is a popular person but not a person who expects the accuracy of facts” have revealed such attributes. The media and fields to be posted were divided and packaged for the reader. For example, in critics of politics and economics, readers demand accuracy. We do not ask for nude photos at the beginning of the weekly photos and sports newspaper. There was such “indication of the credibility level by a package”. Readers and viewers also understood such “display” in a long time.

If readers and viewers see that “a mass media company guarantees the sender’s credit” from the viewpoint of readers and viewers, it will be recognized that people whose speech is posted in mass media are considered to be highly trusted. Therefore, it was a privilege to be chosen by mass media. It was also the privilege of mass media companies to decide “who should be the sender.”

However, no one on the Internet needs to be “chosen.” If you decide that you want to “speak publicly”, you can just upload your own blog, SNS, or YouTube and write your own statement or expression. That’s it. Thus, the mass media’s “privilege of choosing a sender” has disappeared. At the same time, the “privileges that are selected” for the sender also disappeared.

Conversely, “organizations and gatekeepers that secure credit” and “packages that display credit level” have disappeared.