In the age of digital platforms, truth no longer faces the threat of fabrication alone. It also faces another equally serious danger: rumors becoming faster than facts, emotion preceding verification, and people finding themselves confronted with conflicting narratives without knowing which deserves to be believed and which was created to provoke fear, anger or curiosity.
During crises, when a crime shakes society or an incident affects people’s sense of security, news does not take long to begin its journey across phones and screens.
Messages and posts quickly multiply, along with accounts of the incident, its motives and the identities of those allegedly involved. Old or out-of-context photos and videos circulate, while unverified information is sometimes presented as established fact. Amid this flood of content, people may find themselves facing a stream of reports in which it becomes difficult to distinguish reliable information from speculation and rumor.
The events surrounding the Hamoud Church crime in Karak Governorate have brought this question into sharp focus. Beyond the crime itself and its human suffering, another issue has emerged concerning how information is received and circulated, and the consequences that can arise when unverified narratives spread beyond the screen and into society itself.
The purpose here is not to revisit the details of the case or delve into its various narratives, but rather to reflect on what such events reveal about the urgent need for media and information literacy. This awareness can help people deal more effectively with news during tense moments, when the need for accurate information is at its greatest and the risk of misinformation is even higher.
When an incident affects public security or stirs strong emotions, information does not spread because everyone has verified it. It may spread simply because everyone wants to know, and because people feel compelled to understand what happened and tell others about it. This can turn the legitimate desire for knowledge into fertile ground for rumors, particularly when facts become mixed with assumptions, incomplete information is presented with certainty, or statements attributed to unknown sources are repeatedly shared simply because they fit what people expect or fear.
The problem is that rumors do not always need convincing evidence to spread. Sometimes, they only need to touch a deep emotion. A frightening claim may be shared as a warning, an anger-inducing report may be circulated as an act of condemnation, and information presented as exclusive may be shared in pursuit of being first. People may do this in good faith, believing they are protecting others or helping them understand what is happening, while unknowingly contributing to the spread of misinformation.
Therefore, the question is not only who created the rumor or first spread false information, but also who gives it an opportunity to continue and reach more people. Every repost gives content a new lease of life, while every comment that treats an unverified narrative as fact adds a degree of credibility to it. Eventually, it becomes difficult for audiences to remember that what they are seeing may have originated from an anonymous source or an unsubstantiated claim.
In societies built on diversity, pluralism and national cohesion, responsible handling of information becomes even more important. During crises, rumors do not merely mislead individuals; they can fuel hostility, sow suspicion, damage the reputations of people whose responsibility has not been established, undermine trust in institutions, or encourage rhetoric that threatens social peace. For this reason, verifying information is not merely a technical skill but an ethical practice that protects people’s right to know while preserving their dignity and security.
But is it enough to call on people to slow down and verify information whenever a rumor emerges? Can we realistically expect a child, teenager or young person who spends hours on digital platforms to automatically possess the ability to distinguish reliable news from misleading content?
This is where media and information literacy becomes essential—not as an academic term invoked at conferences and events, but as a fundamental life skill that people should learn from an early age and develop as their presence in the digital world expands.
Media and information literacy does not simply mean knowing how to use a phone, navigate applications or search for information. It means understanding how content is produced, how media messages are constructed, the difference between news, opinion and interpretation, how images, headlines and short videos influence our judgments, and why platform algorithms may encourage us to consume more content that triggers our emotions and reinforces our existing beliefs.
At its core, it is the ability to pause before believing, ask about the source before sharing, and distinguish between what we know happened, what we believe happened, what has been confirmed and what remains under verification.
These skills should not begin after a crisis has occurred, when a rumor has already reached thousands of people. They must be developed beforehand at home, at school and at university through practical education that exposes children, adolescents and young people to real-world examples and trains them to examine news sources, compare accounts, identify old images being reused, and understand how a video clip taken out of context can completely alter the meaning of an event.
A child who learns that not everything seen on a screen is true, a teenager who understands that the number of views does not prove the accuracy of a report, and a young person who knows that an anonymous account does not become a reliable source simply because its post has gone viral—all possess basic tools that can protect them from misinformation and help them make more informed decisions in their digital lives.
Equally important is teaching them that verification does not mean simply searching for information that confirms what they have already read. It also requires a willingness to reconsider their beliefs when reliable information contradicts them. Critical thinking does not mean doubting everything, nor does it mean believing everything that comes from a source we have grown accustomed to trusting. It means evaluating evidence, understanding the limits of knowledge and acknowledging that some questions do not yet have definitive answers.
This places a responsibility on educational institutions that goes beyond teaching the safe use of technology. Media and information literacy should become part of educational culture. Students should learn how to read news, examine images, understand the impact of content on audiences and deal with artificial intelligence tools that are now capable of producing highly convincing texts, images and videos. The more capable technology becomes at producing content that appears authentic, the greater our need to teach people how to think about what they see, rather than simply consume it.
Media organizations also have an equally important responsibility. The pursuit of a scoop does not justify publishing unverified information, and high engagement does not turn an anonymous narrative into fact. In cases subject to investigation, accuracy, compliance with the law, respect for the privacy of those affected and the integrity of legal procedures are professional responsibilities that must not be compromised under competitive pressure or the desire to attract audiences.
In the case of the Hamoud Church events, an order was issued banning the publication and circulation of information related to the case and its investigation. This makes adherence to authorized sources and official instructions an essential part of media and legal responsibility.
At the same time, the responsibility for verification cannot be placed entirely on the public. It is unreasonable to expect every individual to become an expert in detecting fabricated content or to be capable of tracing every source.
Media institutions must verify information before publication. Digital platforms must work to limit the spread of misleading content. Educational institutions must build critical-thinking skills. Families must create space for dialogue with their children about what they watch and share. Individuals, meanwhile, must recognize that sharing unverified information is not a neutral act, even when the intention behind it is well-meaning.
In this context comes UNESCO’s Global Media and Information Literacy Week, observed from October 24 to 31 under the theme, “We All Have a Role: Media and Information Literacy for People.” The theme captures a fundamental truth: protecting the public sphere from misinformation is not the responsibility of journalists alone, schools alone or digital platforms alone. It requires a collective effort that begins with how information is produced and ends with how people choose to believe and circulate it.
Perhaps the most important lesson we should take from the events we have witnessed is that confronting rumors does not begin after they spread. It begins with a culture that respects truth, education that equips new generations with the tools to distinguish fact from fiction, and media that understands that public trust is not built by publishing more news, but by ensuring the accuracy and integrity of what is published.
In an era when every user can become a publisher, responsibility is no longer tied only to those who own a media platform. It also belongs to those who decide what to put on it, what to pass on to others and what to believe.
Truth does not need people to defend it with words alone. It needs people to protect it through their actions. Sometimes, the most responsible response is not to publish, not to comment and not to allow the emotions of the moment to turn us into part of a problem we believe we are trying to solve.
So, who guards the truth?
It is guarded by media outlets that verify before publishing, institutions that educate before crises occur, families that give their children the ability to ask questions, and generations that understand that possessing information does not mean possessing the truth—and that reaching a piece of news quickly does not necessarily mean getting closer to what is right.
Above all, it is guarded by a person who knows that they have the right to ask questions, but also the responsibility not to turn what they do not know into a “truth” that others will circulate.
Source: Al-Ghad
