Truthfulness is a virtue and, therefore, a habitual disposition of a person through which they express the truth of the external or inner world, in such a way that their words express observed reality. In turn, truth—as the RAE points out—is the “conformity of things with the concept that the mind forms of them.” Truthfulness is of particular importance for anyone who speaks in public spaces: professors, politicians, journalists, and anyone who, through various media outlets, exercises the universal human right to information.

A truthful person is someone whose moral character is the virtue of truthfulness. The media, in its various forms (mass media, social networks, digital platforms), enjoy credibility to the extent that its actors express the truth. The public—each one of us—has the right to receive truthful information, which increases the responsibility of both professionals (journalists, influencers) and casual users (social media users). They have the right to express themselves, investigate, and publish their research or opinions, but they also have to communicate them truthfully. An elusive truth, so often suffocated by the practices of selecting, silencing, enhancing, or falsifying reality.

Freedom of expression and opinion entail the duty to respect the truth of the messages we post in the public space. When this respect for the truth is lacking, it’s very easy for corruption to creep into the way news content and/or opinions are expressed. Unbridled passion prevails over courtesy, kindness, and good manners, ignoring the common wisdom: “courtesy does not negate courage.” This corruption is particularly evident on some social media platforms, filled with posts lacking content and reason and so full of insults, outrages, and insults. A spiral of informational violence ensues: insults are met with more insults, half-truths are countered with half-truths, etc. A win-win situation: polarization of public opinion, mistrust, frayed tempers, mutual suspicion.

Seeking the truth, expressing the truth, is an essential function for communicators. A difficult task, surrounded by obstacles from the environment and one’s own personal consistency. Every act of information is intended to serve the truth, but we know that—to a greater or lesser extent—character biases, avowed or hidden interests, likes, dislikes, and worldviews of the agent, along with their geniuses and demons, are all mixed together. I don’t yearn for a pure act of information, free of dust and straw, just as I don’t think about a pure theory of law. But, in honor of the truth and the pursuit of social harmony, it is appropriate to strive to reduce the harmful noise that hinders the quality of information messages.

Chesterton says about this (To Be a Good Journalist.  CEU Ediciones, 2021): “I can understand that nothing is reported about some cause, but I cannot understand that something is reported widely without saying anything (p. 38).” Cyberspace is rife with endless news and opinions on multiple topics. Every citizen has the right to participate in public debate. As in any human activity, the wheat and the chaff coexist in social dialogue. There are debates in which the truth is illuminated, and there are also those in which all kinds of information are poured out and nothing is said. Toxic messages undermine social coexistence. Rather, we need a culture of encounter, for which the virtue of truthfulness creates trust, an essential ingredient of a community’s social capital.