There are lies, damned lies and then there's the Internet. Urban myths, rumours, hoaxes, propaganda, conspiracy theories; the Web is awash with fiction presented as fact.
Only on the Internet could a Bray teenager top the poll as "Person of the Century" on the Time magazine website. Only the Internet could spawn the Blair Witch Project, an elaborate hoax which turned into the success story of the year in US cinemas. If that's not enough, there's Sunscreen, the Salinger incident, the Y2K quick fix, or whatever you're having yourself.
Each of these "celebrity hoaxes" demonstrates the power of the Internet as a tool for the widespread communication of untruths. They also seem to show that the public is increasingly unable, or unwilling, to separate fact from fiction. Admittedly, some fibs are easily spotted. We've all received an email along the lines of "Win $7 million in 24 hours". Or we've been sent stories more fantastic than those in the National Enquirer. Or seen the telltale postscript: "This is absolutely true. It happened to me".
However, there are many more subtle lies woven through, and virtually indistinguishable from, all of the useful and useless information on the Internet. It is here that a lie can be most effective. Better still, if a story is really clever, or funny, or bizarre, it can jump from the Internet to other media, provoking amusement, admiration, confusion - or all three.
As a medium, the Internet might well have been built for the purpose of easing lies into global currency. With minimal resources, anyone can unleash a specious web site or email message on an attentive, world-wide audience.
Traditionally, the art of invention online has been motivated by a sense of mischief. It is also appealing, no doubt, to watch a story gaining currency and credibility. Most hoaxes are designed to make members of the public, multi-million-pound companies, celebrities or politicians look ridiculous.
The hoax is at its best when it exposes social or intellectual vanity or snobbery, as exemplified in the Sunscreen/Kurt Vonnegut incident. A series of rather banal observations from a small-town American columnist were hailed on the Internet as a Desiderata for the modern age from a famous novelist. Even when Kurt Vonnegut denied that he had advised everyone to wear sunscreen, among other things, the online rumour machine kept on grinding out the myth.
By then, it didn't really matter who had written it. Sunscreen was absorbed into popular culture; printed off and republished ad nauseum. Its spin-offs included a number one song and a hilarious Irish pastiche that got some, but not enough, airplay this summer. The prank fulfilled its purpose. Significance was attached to a column of trite observations, which could have been written by anyone.
Satisfying as it must be to expose social foibles, embarrass stars or create public relations nightmares for corporations, the hoaxer's ultimate kick is to influence events in the real world, often for the worse. When this happens, the Internet hoax changes from harmless prank into something more sinister.
In 1996, the former US presidential press secretary and ABC news reporter, Pierre Salinger, alleged that a US Navy missile had shot down TWA flight 800 off the eastern US coast, killing the 230 people on board. Salinger had gleaned the information from an official-looking web page supposedly from the French intelligence service. Salinger's story caused consternation in government and the media - and mortal embarrassment for the author, when he discovered the truth.
Bizarrely, once a hoax has gained some currency offline it can, at least in part, become a self-fulfilling prophecy. In the case of the hero that nearly was - Ronnie O'Brien, the Bray teenager currently playing with Juventus - Irish fans organised a campaign to click him to the top of Time's online vote for "People of the Century". Once Time realised how flawed the online poll was it knocked him from the top spot, but the exposure means he is now far better known to those who read the story in the mainstream media.
One of the hottest stories this summer has been The Blair Witch Project. As well as being a brilliant, not to mention profitable, demonstration of the manipulation of the line between truth and fiction, The Blair Witch Project is a low-budget horror film which had a huge fan base long before it was released.
A website set up by Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez, describing the mysterious deaths of three students making a documentary, laid the groundwork for the film's success. Before long, the story had inspired over 20 fan club sites, a mailing list and various chat groups.
Although the film has only been released in the past couple of months in the US, it looks set to become one of the most profitable low-budget films of the decade.
Ingenuity aside, the project has thrown up some interesting questions. Blair Witch has become one of the most successful hoaxes ever to emerge from the Internet. Its popularity not only continued unabated by its exposure, but grew. Can this be attributed to the strength of the film itself? Or is it the power of popular culture? It seems that the public doesn't mind being had - by clever entrepreneurs.
On a more cynical note, there has been speculation that the online fan base for Blair Witch was itself faked to generate interest. If this were the case it would be an Internet hoax within a hoax to promote a real-world film.
The public is perfectly willing to suspend disbelief in the pursuit of entertainment. But as fiction encroaches further and further into reality, is there a danger that people will have trouble separating truth from untruth?
Earlier this year, Warner Bros withdrew a film called Y2K because of fears that its presentation of the consequences of the millennium bug might frighten people. Big-budget moviemakers might leave nothing to chance, but what does it say about the film-going public?
The current consensus appears to be that Internet hoaxes are fun so long as no one gets hurt. However, given the extraordinary powers of dissemination and persuasion they have demonstrated, these hoaxes have huge potential for use maliciously by extremists, or in the interests of making money.
For now, Internet users seem willing to buy into myth presented as fact. They may have to become more discerning in the future. Otherwise the Internet runs the risk of becoming more virtual than real.