Before You Believe It: Use the 5Ws + H
Updated: 1 day ago
A surprising claim can sound convincing long before we know whether it is true. Here’s a simple way to slow down, ask better questions and become harder to fool.
Imagine a video appears on your feed with a dramatic caption: “Scientists have discovered something nobody can explain.”
There’s blurry footage. Someone speaking confidently. Thousands of likes. Maybe even a logo from a news organisation or university.
What do you do?
You could believe it immediately. You could dismiss it immediately. Or you could do something much more useful: ask questions.
You don’t need to be a scientist, journalist or detective to investigate a claim. One of the simplest tools is something you probably already know from school: the 5Ws and H — Who, What, When, Where, Why and How.
The difference is that instead of using them to write a story, you can use them to test one.
Who is saying it?
Start with the source.
Who originally made the claim? Is it a scientist working in that field, a government organisation, a journalist, an influencer, an anonymous account or simply “someone online”?
This matters because information can gain borrowed credibility. A post might mention a famous university or use the logo of a trusted company even though that organisation never made the claim.
Scammers use the same trick. A fake text might look as though it came from your bank or a delivery company. The colours, logo and wording feel familiar, so your brain thinks, This looks official.
But looking trustworthy and being trustworthy are not the same thing.
Before accepting a claim, try to find out who actually stands behind it.
What exactly are they claiming?
Headlines are designed to grab attention, and sometimes they make a finding sound much more dramatic than it really is.
“Scientists discover proof of X” can be very different from “Researchers found something that might be connected to X.”
Ask yourself: What exactly was discovered? What evidence was actually presented?
Be especially careful with words such as proves, always, never, miracle, secret and guaranteed. Reality is often less dramatic than the headline.
A good habit is to separate the fact from the interpretation.
For example:
Fact: Something unusual was recorded.
Interpretation: Therefore, we know exactly what caused it.
Those are two different statements.
When did this happen?
Old information can suddenly become “new” again online.
A photo from five years ago might be reposted as though it happened yesterday. An old scientific finding might circulate without later research that changed what scientists thought about it.
So check the date. Is the information current? Has anything changed since it was published? Is someone presenting an old event as breaking news? Context can completely change what a post means.
Where did the information come from?
This one is especially useful when you see phrases such as “studies show” or “experts say”.
Which study? Which experts? Where was the research published?
A social media post repeating a claim is not the same as the original source of that claim. Ten accounts sharing the same rumour do not automatically equal ten pieces of evidence. They may all be copying one person.
Whenever possible, trace the information backwards. Where did the story begin?
Why should you believe it?
This does not mean asking, “Do I personally like this idea?”
It means asking: What makes the claim convincing?
Is there evidence? Have other trustworthy sources confirmed it? Can the evidence be checked? Or does the claim simply sound convincing because it includes technical words, impressive numbers or someone speaking confidently?
Our brains can also be more willing to believe information that matches what we already think. If a headline tells you something you really want to be true, that can be a good moment to become even more careful.
How do they know?
This may be the most important question of all.
How was the information discovered? How was it measured? How was it tested? Could there be another explanation?
Suppose somebody claims they can predict what card you will choose from a deck. The interesting question isn’t only whether they guessed correctly. It is how they did it.
Could they see the cards? Was the deck arranged beforehand? Did they influence your choice without you noticing?
The same thinking applies to scientific claims, viral videos and news stories. A conclusion becomes much stronger when we understand the process that produced it.
You don’t have to choose between curiosity and scepticism
Sometimes people think there are only two choices: believe an extraordinary claim or laugh at it.
There’s a better option.
You can say:
“That’s fascinating. What’s the evidence?”
Being sceptical does not mean refusing to believe anything unusual. It means being willing to wait for enough evidence before deciding what you think. And being curious does not mean accepting every mystery as proof of something extraordinary.
In fact, the two work very well together.
Curiosity asks: “What could this be?”
Critical thinking asks: “How could we find out?”
Try the 5Ws + H on your own feed
The next time you see something surprising online, pause before sharing it and run through the questions:
Who said it?
What are they actually claiming?
When did it happen?
Where did the information come from?
Why should you believe it?
How do they know?
You probably won’t need all six questions every time. Sometimes just one of them reveals a problem immediately. And sometimes, after checking everything, the extraordinary claim turns out to be true. That is part of what makes discovery exciting.
A very strange story from 1835
Long before social media, people were already dealing with sensational claims, borrowed credibility and stories that sounded scientific enough to make readers stop and wonder.
Episode 4 of FYP: For You Podcast travels back to 1835, when a newspaper published an extraordinary story about discoveries supposedly made on the Moon.
How convincing was it? Why did people pay attention? And what can a nearly 200-year-old media story teach us about the information appearing on our feeds today?
Listen to Episode 4: The Great Moon Hoax to find out.
A better feed for curious minds. Stories and ideas worth your attention.
Comments