Media Literacy and Fake News (1 Viewer)

Ayo · Oct 2, 2019

The Canadian Journalism Federation is taking fake news very seriously. I've worked with media literacy for years, and this is - to date - the most expansively public approach that I've seen, in advance of the Federal Election.

Journalism group launches anti-fake news campaign ahead of Canadian election

Recent polling suggests nearly all Canadians have come across misinformation online, yet only 40 per cent feel they know how to differentiate between fake news and the real thing.

www.thestar.com

If you are engaged online, you have likely been subjected to something that was not true, and yet there isn't much pursuit in trying to determine factual accuracy of the articles and information. And most of us - probably every single one of us here - have fallen for it.

Recent polling by Ipsos, Earnscliffe Strategy Group and MIT researchers suggests nearly all Canadians have come across misinformation online, yet only 40 per cent feel they know how to differentiate between fake news and the real thing.

The polls also found 90 per cent of Canadians admitted to falling for fake news in the past, and only a third of them regularly check to see if the stories they’re consuming are legitimate.

I don't think that their approach is going to be enough. I think the most effective utility it will have is bringing awareness. But fuller approaches to media literacy are going to be necessary to combat the deluge of increasingly deceptive media. These are hard skills that can be learned, but with the advent of new 'deep fake' technology, media literacy is going to have adapt, too.

I would like to see greater emphasis on media literacy in the US. Because even though this statement is for the Canadian audience, it definitely - maybe even more so - applies to the US where news is more infotainment and sensationalized than it is up here:

“To be an engaged citizen, you have to have access to quality journalism… you have to understand what is quality journalism and what is not,” said Richard Gingras, vice-president of Google News.

Another source includes one approach - the SPOT approach: https://www.manitoulin.ca/news-media-canada-launches-new-tool-to-help-people-spot-fake-news/

SPOT is an acronym that acts as a simple way to remember the four principles of identifying misinformation. It works like this:
S: Is this a credible source? Check the source of the article—and be skeptical.
P: Is the perspective biased? Think critically and look for varying viewpoints on an issue.
O: Are other sources reporting the same story? Be your own fact-checker and verify the validity of the story.
T: Is the story timely? Check the date the story was published—sometimes, stories use old information to take advantage of a timely occurrence.

It's obviously not enough, but a decent start.

V Chip · Dec 1, 2019

BobE said:

Yeah, that's just ridiculous. Fashion writer or no, that take is eyeroll worthy.

Beach Friends · Dec 1, 2019

Some see it, some don't I guess.

That's what makes this world such a wonderful place!

MT15 · Dec 2, 2019

BobE said:
I'm not outraged or even losing sleep over it. But if you can't see the hypocrisy in it then meh. Yet the media wonders why no one trusts them fashion writer or not.

you are being lied to by the WH far more than any media outlet, though. Of course that’s horrible hypocrisy, but it still pales to the Trump hypocrisy.

Beach Friends · Dec 2, 2019

MT15 said:
you are being lied to by the WH far more than any media outlet, though. Of course that’s horrible hypocrisy, but it still pales to the Trump hypocrisy.

Whatabout Trump...again?

Archies Ghost · Dec 2, 2019

MT15 said:
you are being lied to by the WH far more than any media outlet, though. Of course that’s horrible hypocrisy, but it still pales to the Trump hypocrisy.

You cannot allow anything to not be about Trump?

coldseat · Dec 2, 2019

People will always complain about the media no matter what. I get it as the media should not be free from criticism and many of those complaints have validity.

What I don't get is how republicans and the right can criticize "main-stream-media" for being left, liberal, hypocrites, etc., but not be able to recognize, or acknowledge that the right wing media does all of the things the MSM media does, just much more blatantly and without hesitation. The right wing media is much more agenda driven and purposeful in how it covers the news, so that their viewers and listeners all reach the same conclusions.

While the MSM can have agendas, be loud and full of hypocrisy (these problems are openly discussed even by liberals), there is enough variety and independence that you always get dissent, you always get push back when things go to far and there is always nuance involved. The right wing is much more direct and simplistic with their messaging so that is resonates with their listeners/viewers and so that those messages become ingrained. The MSM is constantly changing their messaging/news coverage with whatever is the latest reasoning, explanation and information is. It's one of the reasons they really can't compete with the right wing media in terms of indoctrinating/conditioning their listeners and why they struggle comparatively in ratings.

How do you see all of the problem on one side of the media, but completely ignore the larger and more problematic media that you listen to as a consumer of right wing media?

Beach Friends · Dec 2, 2019

coldseat said:
People will always complain about the media no matter what. I get it as the media should not be free from criticism and many of those complaints have validity.

What I don't get is how republicans and the right can criticize "main-stream-media" for being left, liberal, hypocrites, etc., but not be able to recognize, or acknowledge that the right wing media does all of the things the MSM media does, just much more blatantly and without hesitation. The right wing media is much more agenda driven and purposeful in how it covers the news, so that their viewers and listeners all reach the same conclusions.

While the MSM can have agendas, be loud and full of hypocrisy (these problems are openly discussed even by liberals), there is enough variety and independence that you always get dissent, you always get push back when things go to far and there is always nuance involved. The right wing is much more direct and simplistic with their messaging so that is resonates with their listeners/viewers and so that those messages become ingrained. The MSM is constantly changing their messaging/news coverage with whatever is the latest reasoning, explanation and information is. It's one of the reasons they really can't compete with the right wing media in terms of indoctrinating/conditioning their listeners and why they struggle comparatively in ratings.

How do you see all of the problem on one side of the media, but completely ignore the larger and more problematic media that you listen to as a consumer of right wing media?

You are free to post the examples of the right wing media doing bad.

In the meantime, do you mind pointing out what issues, if any, that you see with the two snippets from the fashion journalist posted above?

coldseat · Dec 2, 2019

Beach Friends said:
In the meantime, do you mind pointing out what issues, if any, that you see with the two snippets from the fashion journalist posted above?

I think they're both kind of stupid/pointless snippets/post (or whatever they're called). The Melania reaction obviously draws from the authors animosity towards Trump and the administrations policies and doesn't really have anything to do with what she's wearing and why. The Hillary reaction reads to much into her clothing choice as some transcendent statement. She's showing obvious bias in her reactions.

I also think this is so obvious (even if it weren't side by side) that it makes little impact on people who did see it, unless they want to use it to overreact. I don't really think this is representative of what "the media does".

BobE · Dec 2, 2019

So how do we feel about a media outlet, in this case Bloomberg stating they will not investigate Bloomberg or any other Democratic candidate but only Trump?

coldseat · Dec 2, 2019

BobE said:
So how do we feel about a media outlet, in this case Bloomberg stating they will not investigate Bloomberg or any other Democratic candidate but only Trump?

They where talking about that on CNN over the weekend (I think I was watching Reliable Sources). They said this is bad for both Bloomberg and for Bloomberg news. It makes them both look compromised. The one thing America doesn't need is more billionaires trying to control the media narrative.

I agree completely.

BobE · Dec 2, 2019

samiam5211 · Dec 2, 2019

BobE said:

Mayor big gulp walked right into that one.

MT15 · Dec 2, 2019

Archies Ghost said:
You cannot allow anything to not be about Trump?

It’s hard to ignore the elephant in the room, so to speak.

okay, I’ll keep to the topic. It’s a stupid statement from Bloomberg. But when was the last time that Breitbart or any other partisan right leaning tabloid did an in depth investigation into wrongdoing by one of their faves? It’s more likely to be ignored than even mentioned.

We shouldn’t pay too much attention to media outlets who are biased to begin with, at least imo. Or consume their product with a healthy skepticism.

Beach Friends · Dec 3, 2019

MT15 said:
It’s hard to ignore the elephant in the room, so to speak.

okay, I’ll keep to the topic. It’s a stupid statement from Bloomberg. But when was the last time that Breitbart or any other partisan right leaning tabloid did an in depth investigation into wrongdoing by one of their faves? It’s more likely to be ignored than even mentioned.

We shouldn’t pay too much attention to media outlets who are biased to begin with, at least imo. Or consume their product with a healthy skepticism.

Well, that begs the question, which media outlets are not biased to begin with?

MT15 · Dec 3, 2019

There are several, quite a few if you ignore the editorial content. It’s been discussed I think in the beginning of this thread. With charts and various graphs.

Reuter’s is the one most folks think of. AP is another, I think.

cuddlemonkey · Dec 3, 2019

MT15 said:
There are several, quite a few if you ignore the editorial content. It’s been discussed I think in the beginning of this thread. With charts and various graphs.

Reuter’s is the one most folks think of. AP is another, I think.

Those are definitely the 2 I would go for.

superchuck500 · Dec 3, 2019

Beach Friends said:
Well, that begs the question, which media outlets are not biased to begin with?

Unfortunately that truly is a question these days. But also I think we have to be careful to confuse result with bias.

A reporter saying “the forest fire appears to have been started by a careless smoker” isn’t necessarily bias against smokers - it might be genuinely appropriate reporting. In this hyper-partisan era, people presume that media that is negative or critical of a person or agenda is necessarily biased against that person or agenda. Ideally that would never be true, though sadly it often is. BUT that doesn’t mean it always is.

Once we get into the mindset of presuming that criticism = bias, objectivity is lost.

samiam5211 · Dec 3, 2019

As a society we should focus more of our attention on ways to identify bias, rather than argue about who is biased.

The people always change, the fundamental methods do not.

Propaganda techniques are universal.

All of our news is plagued by overuse of a version of the glittering generalities propaganda technique. That is a more useful discussion than, “Why does wolf Blitzer exaggerate so much?”

Media Literacy and Fake News (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

Spirit Grocer

Truth Addict

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Guv'nor

Well-known member

Guv'nor

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known monkey

U.S. Blues

Well-known member

Share this page

Advertisement

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Sponsored