Agreed, but the thread title is quite specific in the question it asks, and really, we lack the evidence to answer it at this stage.
As a more general point I would like to repeat what the guy at The Gospel Coalition site wrote:
I'm afraid there are a few on CF who need to read this carefully.
I agree with you on that one. Nonetheless, this saying goes far beyond Christians - in times where war is being broadcast right to our fingertips, the emotions have never been higher. To be honest, I've just "experienced" these very emotional, fear- and hate-driven interactions since this newest Gaza/ISIS war. It's been the first time that I've had the feeling that a conflict from far away is brought to my doorstep via the Internet and social media.
This will be a problem in the mid future, given the fact that our information is always subject to bias and we tend to pick our sources based on the sources of our friends.
There was a study published last week that showed that we get our information from the same sources that our friends get their information from. In the Gaza conflict, this has lead to the formation of two factions - the Pro-Palestinian faction and the Pro-Israeli faction. Two distinct clouds with the same news sources that have two completely different views on the conflict as a whole and on singular events.
I would go so far as to say that this phenomenon affects us
all and will be cause of further conflicts as perceptions within our society and parallel-societies drift further apart.
Reports on ISIS, for example, go far apart depending on if you trust Arab social media or Western social media.
Western social media: reports of terror, persecution and slaughter.
Arab social media: reports of a "true Sharia state - the rest is just lies
Alternate social media: ISIS is "armed and controlled" by Israel and the US
To me, I obviously believe that the first is closest to the truth.
Then again - to someone whose friends are constantly posting alternative reality #3, I will just be a "blind sheep" who follows his leaders.
Either way, new technology opens doors for good reporting and malicious manipulation. So, yes, you are absolutely right in your criticism of spreading unsubstantiated claims. Sadly, it's not very easy to draw the line - at what point does a claim have enough "substantiation"? Videos can be faked, photos can be photoshopped or relabeled, background stories and history can be rewritten. :/