A few hours ago the Internet was abuzz on the possibility of U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts resigning.  For those not familiar with U.S. politics you need to understand that the court has, for as long as I’ve been keeping track, maintained a balance of 4 conservatives, 4 liberals and one swing vote.

It’s well known that justices wait for Presidents who share their politics before resigning.  That’s why the same ratio has been maintained for so long.  Meaning a resignation by Roberts (appointed by George W. Bush) would allow President Barack Obama to appoint  his replacement and change the court’s ratio indefinitely. 

But, as my title suggests, this was all a hoax.  A hoax that spread across the internet as fact.  That’s what makes this whole story interesting (and tech related for that matter). 

The site Above the Law, a self-described Legal Tabloid, found the story behind this hoax in an article entitled “Anatomy of a Rumor: The Story Behind Chief Justice John Roberts’s ‘Retirement’”

Here’s an account of what went down in Professor Peter Tague’s criminal law class this morning, from a 1L at Georgetown Law:

Today’s class was partially on the validity of informants not explaining their sources. [Professor Tague] started off class at around 9 am EST by telling us not to tell anyone, but that we might find it interesting that tomorrow, Roberts would be announcing his retirement for health concerns. He refused to tell anyone how he knew. Then, at around 9:30, he let everyone in on the joke.

Note the timestamps on the Radar posts. The first one came out at 6:10 a.m., i.e., the Pacific Time equivalent of 9:10 a.m. Eastern time. The retraction came out at 6:36 a.m., i.e., the
Pacific Time equivalent of 9:36 a.m. Eastern — shortly after Professor Tague let his class in on the joke.

A second Georgetown Law student confirms this account:

Our criminal justice professor started our 9 am lecture with the news that roberts will be resigning tomorow for health reasons — that he could not handle the administrative burdens of the job. He would not say how he knows — but halfway through our lecture on the credibility and reliability of informants he revealed that the Roberts rumor was made up to show how someone you ordinarily think is credible and reliable (ie a law professor) can disseminate inaccurate information.

By then the horse was out of the barn — and running at a gallop:

[B]etween the hour when the class began and when he revealed that he made it up, plenty of students txted and IM’ed their friends and family…. [So] there’s a very good chance that the Roberts rumor that spread like wildfire on the internet was sparked by an eccentric law professor trying to make a point.

We’ve reached out to the aforementioned eccentric law professor, by telephone and by email, but we haven’t heard back from him yet. If we do, we will update this post.

This is exactly what I’m talking about when I attack Twitter as a news source.  Put this in perspective for a minute.  This is one law class and this rumor only existed as a possible truth for about 30 minutes yet it was enough to get to the top of Memeorandum.com and was quoted by innumerable sources.

Now imagine all the rumors that are out there and not immediately corrected.  Imagine a situation like a terrorist attack where rumors are running rampant and everyone is trying to get and disseminate any information they can.  In that situation it’s inevitable that you’ll get as much if not more falsehood than truth.

So again I point out that trusting social media for real-time news just doesn’t work.  The medium’s very nature lends itself to producing false accounts because of the speed by which information travels. 

Now one final question.  With all the unscrupulous internet sites out there desperate for people to click on their ads is it any wonder this happens a lot?  Wouldn’t you expect it to happen more often in the future?  I’ll eat my words if the site that originally reported this (radaronline.com) goes out of business in the next few months but the far more likely result is they’ll get a boost in traffic.  Making hoaxes like this even more likely to spread in the future.