PBS
PBS
Lindsey Clancy and Social Media Journalism
Lindsey Clancy and Social Media Journalism
Lindsay Clancy, 36, of Massachusetts, was tried in 2026 on three counts of murder in the deaths of her three children: five-year Cora, three-year old Dawson, and Callan, eight months.
Clancy and her legal defense team did not dispute that she caused their deaths. Her defense was a lack of criminal responsibility due to intense postpartum psychosis, a long history of mental health issues, and improper treatment by her medical team.
The aforementioned TikTok comment implies that Lindsey Clancy is irreproachable in the death of her children, and rather Patrick Clancy, Lindsey’s ex-husband, committed the murders and convinced Lindsey of her guilt.
This is only one of many comments insinuating this conspiracy that Patrick himself has described as “deeply harmful” and “painful” in a recent 60 Minutes interview – his first public interview since the trial’s conclusion.
There is an overwhelming number of comments spreading false information and twisted narratives about the case.
This is reflected in comments such as,“She admitted it. PATRICK was the one reporting her alleged confession to the investigators while she was still being hospitalized, ” from TikToker @kerokuma17.
This completely false comment only scratches the surface of a bigger problem facing the world in the realm of journalism: the ‘new’ news: social media.
In recent years, there has been a surge in the use of social media as a source of news. This is not the only example of a transition in mass media sources. In the 1960s, news saw a migration from physical media to television. However, the rise of smartphones has made information more accessible than ever, with everything at everyone’s fingertips – and news is a prime example.
According to a Pew Research Center study, over half of U.S. adults get their news from social media at least sometimes. While social media is a useful tool, it is notorious for misinformation, edited photographs, and falsified narratives.
The Lindsay Clancy trial is just the most recent example of this phenomenon. This was especially evident in the Clancy case: floating information and how it can impact life beyond our phones.
The Clancy trial started on July 20, 2026, and concluded on Sept.4, 2026.
The trial was all over social media, prompting users to add their personal input. The internet quickly seemed to take Lindsey’s side, with a spectrum of different stances. While some spectators used Clancy as an example of why investment into women’s maternal health is critical, others took it further, letting empathy develop into delusion.
There is an online community spreading the idea that Patrick Clancy committed the murder of his three children. Some TikTokers even went as far as to say that the prosecution, Patrick Clancy, and the investigator were all teamed up to work against Lindsey.
TikToker @millvsgovt made a Bratz doll reenactment of the crime scene based on the evidence and claimed to see something that the trained investigators did not. This reenactment claimed that Patrick also committed the crime and explained how he staged it to look like Lindsey did it.
Members of this TikTok community, who were already on Lindsey’s side, took this video as the perfect piece of evidence to support their claim that she did not commit the murders.
The idea that the case investigator did not investigate the crime scene and only took Patrick’s word began to circulate.
This inaccurate information spread rapidly, and for ordinary people who did not have time to watch a 15-minute news segment or read a 7-minute article about the trial, it was as credible as the truth.
Masses of people are believing in, or at the very least considering, a completely unfounded claim of a serious criminal case. The overwhelming lack of reliable knowledge and the absence of care in sourcing reputable sites are a major threat of deception for over half of U.S. adults who receive their information online.
The case eventually ended in a mistrial, and the outcome of a potential retrial is unknown.
Journalists and online readers alike should consider the real consequences of digital misreporting.
The real question, however, lies with the journalist: how can we counter the belief that journalism is a dying field despite the rise of misinformation and disinformation? It is clearer than ever that people still desperately need accurate and dependable news.
Regarding how social media has changed journalism, Spelman student and journalist Barlow believes it has changed the format in which companies ask journalists to report. Companies want to span multiple platforms to maintain their relevance and expect up-and-coming journalists to be up for the task.
“They want us to be able to report now on TikTok, to learn how to make short-form content, " said Barlow.
Barlow shares that the new generation is too trusting of news spread on social media because they grew up with these online forums, and that the change can come by going back to reputable sources.
While Barlow stresses the importance of turning to reputable news sources, she says the answer is for those sources and journalists to meet the public where they are.
While shocking that most adults get their news from social media, it is still the dominant source. Rather than trying to move adults off social media and into established news publications, let's put the publications on social media.
“Number one, keep storytelling,” Barlow said “Hop on those other stations, like get on TikTok, get on Instagram, and edit your reels. Have your voice on those sources.”
In this day and age, social media has become a crutch for getting information. Society is quick to take everything at face value, whether credible or not.
As individuals, we can make a concerted effort to encourage critical thinking when sourcing online information. Developing and honing skills such as looking beyond what one is told to believe, and conducting proper research on issues important to oneself.
It is always important to stay curious, and to my fellow journalists, there is only so much blame to be placed on the masses before the fault lies with us. As journalists, it is our responsibility to report the truth in an accessible and clear manner. In times of copious falsity, be the reporter people can run to rather than TikTok reporters.
Lindsay Clancy, 36, of Massachusetts, was tried in 2026 on three counts of murder in the deaths of her three children: five-year Cora, three-year old Dawson, and Callan, eight months.
Clancy and her legal defense team did not dispute that she caused their deaths. Her defense was a lack of criminal responsibility due to intense postpartum psychosis, a long history of mental health issues, and improper treatment by her medical team.
The aforementioned TikTok comment implies that Lindsey Clancy is irreproachable in the death of her children, and rather Patrick Clancy, Lindsey’s ex-husband, committed the murders and convinced Lindsey of her guilt.
This is only one of many comments insinuating this conspiracy that Patrick himself has described as “deeply harmful” and “painful” in a recent 60 Minutes interview – his first public interview since the trial’s conclusion.
There is an overwhelming number of comments spreading false information and twisted narratives about the case.
This is reflected in comments such as,“She admitted it. PATRICK was the one reporting her alleged confession to the investigators while she was still being hospitalized, ” from TikToker @kerokuma17.
This completely false comment only scratches the surface of a bigger problem facing the world in the realm of journalism: the ‘new’ news: social media.
In recent years, there has been a surge in the use of social media as a source of news. This is not the only example of a transition in mass media sources. In the 1960s, news saw a migration from physical media to television. However, the rise of smartphones has made information more accessible than ever, with everything at everyone’s fingertips – and news is a prime example.
According to a Pew Research Center study, over half of U.S. adults get their news from social media at least sometimes. While social media is a useful tool, it is notorious for misinformation, edited photographs, and falsified narratives.
The Lindsay Clancy trial is just the most recent example of this phenomenon. This was especially evident in the Clancy case: floating information and how it can impact life beyond our phones.
The Clancy trial started on July 20, 2026, and concluded on Sept.4, 2026.
The trial was all over social media, prompting users to add their personal input. The internet quickly seemed to take Lindsey’s side, with a spectrum of different stances. While some spectators used Clancy as an example of why investment into women’s maternal health is critical, others took it further, letting empathy develop into delusion.
There is an online community spreading the idea that Patrick Clancy committed the murder of his three children. Some TikTokers even went as far as to say that the prosecution, Patrick Clancy, and the investigator were all teamed up to work against Lindsey.
TikToker @millvsgovt made a Bratz doll reenactment of the crime scene based on the evidence and claimed to see something that the trained investigators did not. This reenactment claimed that Patrick also committed the crime and explained how he staged it to look like Lindsey did it.
Members of this TikTok community, who were already on Lindsey’s side, took this video as the perfect piece of evidence to support their claim that she did not commit the murders.
The idea that the case investigator did not investigate the crime scene and only took Patrick’s word began to circulate.
This inaccurate information spread rapidly, and for ordinary people who did not have time to watch a 15-minute news segment or read a 7-minute article about the trial, it was as credible as the truth.
Masses of people are believing in, or at the very least considering, a completely unfounded claim of a serious criminal case. The overwhelming lack of reliable knowledge and the absence of care in sourcing reputable sites are a major threat of deception for over half of U.S. adults who receive their information online.
The case eventually ended in a mistrial, and the outcome of a potential retrial is unknown.
Journalists and online readers alike should consider the real consequences of digital misreporting.
The real question, however, lies with the journalist: how can we counter the belief that journalism is a dying field despite the rise of misinformation and disinformation? It is clearer than ever that people still desperately need accurate and dependable news.
Regarding how social media has changed journalism, Spelman student and journalist Barlow believes it has changed the format in which companies ask journalists to report. Companies want to span multiple platforms to maintain their relevance and expect up-and-coming journalists to be up for the task.
“They want us to be able to report now on TikTok, to learn how to make short-form content, " said Barlow.
Barlow shares that the new generation is too trusting of news spread on social media because they grew up with these online forums, and that the change can come by going back to reputable sources.
While Barlow stresses the importance of turning to reputable news sources, she says the answer is for those sources and journalists to meet the public where they are.
While shocking that most adults get their news from social media, it is still the dominant source. Rather than trying to move adults off social media and into established news publications, let's put the publications on social media.
“Number one, keep storytelling,” Barlow said “Hop on those other stations, like get on TikTok, get on Instagram, and edit your reels. Have your voice on those sources.”
In this day and age, social media has become a crutch for getting information. Society is quick to take everything at face value, whether credible or not.
As individuals, we can make a concerted effort to encourage critical thinking when sourcing online information. Developing and honing skills such as looking beyond what one is told to believe, and conducting proper research on issues important to oneself.
It is always important to stay curious, and to my fellow journalists, there is only so much blame to be placed on the masses before the fault lies with us. As journalists, it is our responsibility to report the truth in an accessible and clear manner. In times of copious falsity, be the reporter people can run to rather than TikTok reporters.