Manufacturing and handling rumors in the BTS Fandom
The practice of creating and spreading rumors is a common one, but when it has internet and social media as its platform, it ends up as something that can't be contained and false rumors can become truths more easily. They become part of conspiracy theories and used as evidence to claims. We can see this in the theories surrounding Covid-19 and vaccines or QAnon. Celebrity culture is a fertile ground for allegations and the rumors represent the juicy part of it. This is something we encounter in the BTS fandom as well. My starting points for this piece were activities that I have observed on social media and also this post made by @beautifulpersonpeach that you can find here. It gathers empirical evidence and uses personal involvement in explaining the way false information and threats towards BTS members are spread online and what could be a direct course of action to manage that type of content.
What I wanted to do was to look at the bigger picture. @beautifulpersonpeach has correctly identified that there is a pattern in which hate is formulated that can be used in all cases. Of course that pattern is visible only if one is actively involved in trying to find/recognize it when it comes to all members, but if a fan is prone to focus on their bias, of course they end up believing that their subject of focus is getting more hate than others. We only see what our own micro-community lets us see. Moving beyond that, I did some research to find out the way in which false rumors are created, what is the motivation and to figure out if trying to set the record straight can have its desired effect. For this, I will use the patterns identified by Cass R. Sunstein, from Harvard Law School, disseminated in the article ''She Said What?'' ''He Did What?'' Believing False Rumors'' and apply it to a few examples of rumors and opinions of extreme nature that circulate in the online fandom. I will mention at the end of this post a few more articles for further references that focus on data analysis.
Propagators – they are the ones that start the rumors and they can be divided into several categories: narrowly self-interested which promote their own interest by harming a person; generally self-interested – they have no real stake in it but they like the attention so they spread gossip; altruistic – they think that they are doing it for a good cause; and then there are those that have malicious intent as they want to actively harm the person they are creating rumors about.
Sometimes these categories can overlap, for example the malicious propagators can pose as altruistic, stating that they have their best intentions and they are doing it in order to make things clear for everyone. For example, the issue of backdoor advertising involving a clothing line that made the news and which connected Jungkook to it. It is a combination of fact that was used as a basis to create a story and the excuse was that the fandom needs to know of such practices. Those who were implicated in it reached to the Fair Trade Commission on this grounds but then it turned out that in this particular case, there was no wrong doing according to the law.
People can be divided into two categories. Sometimes they simply can't accept the false rumor because it doesn't fit with the image that they have of that certain individual, so they try to reduce their cognitive dissonance. But on the other hand, this reduction happens as well in the cases of those who are prone to believe the rumors. If they dislike a certain person, of course it's easier for them to take rumors as facts. It's about having strong prior convictions. If for example, one person in the fandom does not like Jimin, they end up accepting made up rumors that fit with their own beliefs. If they are part of a community of like minded people, their beliefs become stronger, as their view is shared by others. They have their own evidence at their disposal that apparently is proof for the rumor that let's say, Jimin can't sing or he's violent, or a predator. The evidence is created by the same people who do not like him by cutting up clips, modifying them and creating an entire discourse around it.
The usual apparent solution to this is presenting different perspectives, or balanced information. This is what we see on twitter in the fandom. For example, a category of shippers, let's say Taekookers, have created a certain narrative and they run with it. Then, people who belong to other micro-communities are coming in, not only saying that it's not true, but by presenting the factual information, sometimes with a direct link to original BTS content. It is actually impossible to make them change their views and in turn, it creates more harm, it produces greater polarization. One reason why this happens is because of the source that offers that information. If a Taekooker would come and correct the fake information, there are greater chances of change because of peer pressure, but if a Vminer or Jikooker would do the same thing, their action would only make others more set in their own fabricated beliefs. A similar thing can be said about reporting accounts. This is a common practice, one that has its purpose, that is to deal with harmful posts about BTS members. There is an etiquette to it, on how to properly engage with it and how to stop it. In a way, this is a Hydra Problem. The accounts may disappear, but newly ones are made immediately, having the same type of content. Internet speech cannot be really regulated if there is no actual prospect of consequence, like a libel law.
I would like to end this part with a quote from Sunstein that summarizes why/how rumors are believed and what is the motivation:
''The success or failure of rumors depends in large part of people’s antecedent convictions. Some people are predisposed to accept certain damaging statements about public officials or important institutions. They are strongly motivated to accept those statements, which may provide a kind of emotional relief, or which may support their initial inclinations and in that sense reduce dissonance or otherwise fit with their desires. Other people, favorably disposed toward those people and institutions, are predisposed to reject the same statements simply because they produce discomfort or dissonance.
This point about motivations is complemented by one about information. When people begin with an initial view, it is usually because of what they know. If a rumor fits well with what they already believe, they have some reason to conclude that it is true. If the rumor is wildly inconsistent with their existing knowledge, they have some reason not to credit it. Different people and groups will have different thresholds for accepting beliefs that fit poorly with their existing motivations and knowledge.''
There is one more aspect that I want to touch which is the purpose of vindication, by those who want to clear rumors and set things straight. With this type of practice I think we need to be really careful in assessing what types of situations actually need that. Sometimes, underneath the rumors created with the intent to do harm, there is some truth, a fact, that of course can get distorted depending on the agenda at play. Not every opinion on the internet can do actual harm and doesn't have to be reported. What happens if one day, that idol actually makes a mistake? Do we try to clear their name as well in that particular situation? They are humans, just as us ordinary individuals. We can all do wrong, of various degrees. This practice must not become an extreme and my hope is that people are able to differentiate between something that is false and something that actually happened. Fans should not become self-proclaimed saviors/defenders or at least, they should thread carefully. Despite the Burning Sun scandal, Seungri still has fans defending him. That is an extreme case but should be taken as cautionary of what not to do when it comes to fandom labor.
On a completely different level is the Jungkook case of alleged backdoor advertising. Of course the sources are dubious and reports have been made to expose those who gathered and put together the information, but the fandom quickly jumped on the defense side, automatically assuming that it's simply slander. No one takes into consideration the possibility that in that particular situation he might have done something wrong, even unknowingly, by not disclosing his position as in-house director. As I said, people make mistakes and that's not a reason for cancellation or character assassination. In the end, HYBE decided not to release a statement and the conclusion was that he is not guilty of anything. The fandom was happy. That's ok and expected. I certainly don't hope anyone to get caught doing something bad, but I believe that we need not only balanced information, but also a balanced way of looking at certain situations, taking into consideration all possible motives. Taking a middle ground until all the facts come to the surface is the safer decision.
Kathrin Eismann, ‘’Diffusion and persistence of false rumors in social media networks: implications of searchability on rumor self-correction on Twitter’’, Journal of Business Economics, 2021
Y. Shen, C. Lee, L. Pan et al. ''Why people spread rumors on social media: developing and validating a multi-attribute model of online rumor dissemination'', Online Information Review, 2021
C. Sunstein,''She Said What?'' ''He Did What?'' Believing False Rumors'', SSRN Electronic Journal, 2011
