When Truth Gets in the Way of a Good Story

Learning Intention: Students will analyse how the media constructs representations of public figures and events, and evaluate how fake news and media bias influence audience belief.

Success Criteria:

By the end of the lesson, I can:

I can explain individuals who leveraged the media to distort the truth and gain power.
I can identify media techniques used to portray them (e.g. emotive language, sensationalism, heroic framing, villain framing).
I can discuss how media portrayal shaped public perception and trust.

How do lies gain power, and what role does the media play in shaping our belief in them?

Part 1 The Power of the Media (5 mins):

Media often has an agenda to construct heroes, villains, or victims to position the audience to believe a certain perspective. This can have economic, political, or personal gains to the both the individual who is featured in the media, the individual who creates the media, and sometimes, the individual who the media is creeated for.
News does not just report — it frames a narrative.
Audiences often trust stories without checking evidence, as traditionally, the form of news media was built on a foundation of trust between the journalist and the evidence they presented, even though news has been faked across time.

Concepts You could Wrestle With:

Truth vs Perceived truth- Truth is information that is factually accurate and supported by evidence. Perceived truth is what people believe to be true, even if it is not based on facts or proof.

In modern media, perception can overpower reality when stories are repeated, emotional, or persuasive.

Confirmation bias -The tendency for people to seek out, believe, and share information that supports their existing opinions, while ignoring or rejecting evidence that contradicts them.

Audiences don’t always want the truth — they want to feel “right.”

Netizens - A neologism (new term) combination of “internet” and “citizens.” Refers to people who actively participate in online communities, shaping public opinion through comments, posts, sharing, and digital activism.

Netizens are the new crowd of voices influencing what trends, spreads, and becomes “truth” online.

Vox populi- A Latin phrase meaning “the voice of the people”, referring to the collective opinions or beliefs of the majority. In media, it captures the idea that public sentiment can drive narratives, regardless of accuracy.

Sometimes the loudest voice is mistaken as the “true” one.

democratisation of the media - The process where ordinary people, not just journalists or experts, can publish and share information thanks to digital platforms. This increases free speech and diverse voices, but also leads to misinformation, noise, and unreliable sources.

More voices = more freedom, but also more confusion.

belief vs evidence Belief is accepting something as true based on emotion, trust, or personal values. Evidence is information that can be proven, verified, and supported by reliable sources.
Modern audiences often choose belief over evidence when a story fits their worldview or feelings.

media framing The way the media selects, shapes, and presents information to create a particular message or emotion. Framing influences how audiences interpret events or people, through word choice, angle, emphasis, and repetition.
The media doesn’t just tell us the news — it tells us how to feel about it

the performance of credibility

The idea that individuals or organisations can look and sound truthful through confidence, branding, tone, appearance, status, or expert performance, even when lying.

Some people perform honesty so well that the audience stops questioning the facts.

Platform = power Those with the biggest platform (media outlet, social feed, public profile, or microphone) have the greatest power to shape public belief.
Visibility and reach can matter more than accuracy.

If you control the platform, you can control the narrative

Audience responsibility

The idea that consumers of media must think critically, question sources, evaluate credibility, and avoid spreading misinformation. With democratised media, audiences are not just receivers of truth — they are responsible participants in it.

Part 2 Select one of the following (or find one of your own choosing) as your case study.

Part 3 Case Study Inquiry Questions

Category A Truth and Belief

Students interrogate why people believed the lie

What made this person’s claims feel believable at the time?
What “truth” did people want to believe, and why?
Did the public believe the person — or did they believe the story the media told about them?
To what extent does emotion make audiences accept something as truth?

Category B Media Construction

Students analyse how the media framed the narrative

How did journalists, influencers, or platforms frame this person (hero? visionary? victim? rebel? expert? saviour?) and why might that framing have been effective?
Which media techniques shaped the audience’s perception (emotive language, metaphors, statistics, expert authority, visual imagery, sensationalism)?
How did coverage change before vs. after the scandal? What does that reveal about the media’s priorities?

Category C Responsibility and Morality

Students evaluate ethics and accountability

Who holds more responsibility when lies spread — the liar, the media, or the public? Justify your view.
Is the media responsible for fact-checking, or just reporting?
Should audiences be more critical, or is it reasonable to expect news to be truthful?

Category D Truth in the Modern World (Synthesis)

These bridge into a discursive assessment

Can truth survive in a world where platforms reward the most exciting story rather than the most accurate one?
Is “truth” becoming a product we are sold rather than a principle we value?
Do we believe stories because they are true, or because they entertain us?

PArt 4 Media Search

Find a short positive “before the scandal” article excerpt

Highlight evidence of media techniques, e.g.:

Emotive language
Sensationalism
Bias
Hero/villain framing
Selective detail
Omission- what has been left out

Find a short negative “after the scandal” article excerpt

Find two pieces of evidence in the article or negative language which highlights how the first article held misinformation.

Find two opposing Netizen published articles

Comment on how the truth has been distorted as a result of public discourse.

Reflection Questions

How have these techniques either distorted your perception of truth or enabled the individual to profit from their framing in the positive article?
How has the subsequent negative article challenged your perception of the individual and therefore truth in a Media driven world?
What language or techniques shaped your reaction or judgment?

Part 5 Whole Class Discussion

How did the media influence your feelings about each person?
Which case was the most persuasive and why?
Did the media create the lie — or simply repeat it?

Part 6 Discussion Warmers for Class Talk

Use these as think-pair-share or Socratic discussion prompts:

Is truth objective, or does society “agree” on truth based on dominant voices?
Should the media be neutral, or should it protect the public from harmful ideas?
Would some lies ever be justified if they lead to a “good” outcome?
If a lie goes viral — is it still just a lie, or does it become a cultural “truth”?

These questions get you thinking discursively - not narratively, not argumentatively, but exploring perspectives.

PART 7 Final Step: Discursive Prep Writing

Short writing task to transition into assessment prep:

Prompt:

“In a world of curated stories, can audiences ever really know the truth?”

To what extent can the media shape public belief, even when the truth is unclear? Refer to one case study.

Page updated

Report abuse