"The online and offline worlds are completely intertwined, especially for adolescents"

Dr Iris Steenhout has an academic background in computer science, criminology, and engineering, specialising in machine learning. She develops algorithms to analyse large datasets, applying her research across a wide range of fields, from public transport aggression and media coverage to healthcare. Currently, she is working with medical records from thousands of individuals—mostly elderly people in fragile health. "Just to be clear: this is done with their consent," she emphasises.

"A fragile health condition can involve weakened muscles, osteoporosis, cognitive decline, or reduced heart function," Steenhout explains. "Using machine learning, we examine medical records to identify factors that might delay the transition from a healthy state to a fragile one. This knowledge can help people remain independent at home for longer—relieving pressure on the healthcare system." Previously, such research required extensive surveys and paper-based records, taking years to analyse. "Now, with digital datasets, we can process much larger amounts of data far more quickly," she says.

Have any key factors emerged from the research so far?

"We've noticed a correlation with social integration. People with weaker social support—fewer close friends or family—tend to experience a faster decline in health. However, we still need to determine whether this is a direct causal link."

For her PhD, Steenhout applied similar machine learning techniques to news articles. The title of her upcoming Fake News Seminar Brussels lecture on 4 April is telling:
"Why you shouldn’t expect just the facts from the news media."

"For many media outlets, chasing attention is more important than seeking the truth. Their priority is to boost readership and viewing figures."

Are all media outlets the same? Isn’t that an unfair generalisation?

"Of course, there are differences between tabloid and quality journalism. But scientific research suggests they are converging in this regard. She also references a concept from German sociologist Niklas Luhmann—the acceleration of communication. Every major leap in communication—the invention of writing, the printing press, film—has reshaped society. With social media, this transformation is happening faster than ever. Today, anyone can claim to be a journalist and spread news or information, often without much expertise. Traditional media feel the pressure of competing with influencers. As a result, they are producing news faster and in greater volume, leaving less time for fact-checking."

The fact that the boy is only 13 is also something many people find implausible. 

“It's not that exceptional, every criminologist knows that. Crime is not reserved for adults. So it is not a new phenomenon. Long ago, there were also urban gangs with young teenagers who went heavily over the top or kicked up a riot.”

That was also in the papers then? 

“Less frequently and certainly not as quickly as today. Now we get that kind of news almost in real time and unfiltered. It immediately becomes news because everyone films everything and puts it online.”

The main theme of the seminar is fake news. What are we doing about it? 

“In-depth research is happening on how fake news spreads and what strategies we can put in place to counter it. One of the speakers at the seminar is VUB colleague Pablo Trigo Kramcsák, who is working on this in a Horizon project. And we have developed a website and an app for young people and their teachers together with several European partners as part of an Erasmus Plus project: InfoReady. It simulates them thinking critically about the information they receive, and how it can be manipulated.”

What can journalists pick up from scientists? 

‘’Scientists look for facts, just like good journalists. They want to bring out the truth. Scientists, fortunately, also have a culture where they can usually debate with each other. Not to polarize, but because clashing opinions are part of the search for truth.’’

“Always automatically drumming up the same ‘heavyweight’ to shine his light on a particular issue is too easy”

From you, an opinion piece recently went viral in which you went against a well-known economist, about the pension scheme of SNCB employees. 

“He gave the impression that one can retire at 55 at the railways. So that is not true. Only train drivers and train supervisors can retire at 55, provided they have 30 continuous years of service in this position. That is almost unheard of. There were seven such people in 2023. Railwaymen who retire are almost exclusively over-60s, as are the majority of Belgians. That 55 years is therefore not at the heart of the current wave of strikes.”

You also had something to say about the generous pensions of SNCB pensioners. 

“In addition to their regular NSSO contributions, SNCB employees contribute a hefty amount extra every month. So they can count on a higher pension at the end. It is their system of pension savings. The government now wants to phase out their pension rights. SNCB employees will then lose that extra savings pot. Incidentally, SNCB transferred in its pension cash to the government to spice up Verhofstadt II's budget, with just under €300 million on top. The condition was that their pension rights would not be touched. I feel bad that this story is distorted, and that people are portrayed as freeloaders because they are striking for their rights.”

So should journalists even fact-check experts? 

“If they don't know what they are talking about, clearly yes. Always automatically drumming up the same ‘heavyweight’ to shed his light on a particular topic is too easy. As a journalist, you have to let different voices be heard, preferably in the same article or news item, and check whether the statements of those experts are consistent with current knowledge. This is where the work of scientists and journalists overlap. When scientists face a study, they also check for other views and what the current consensus is. That, of course, takes time and effort.”