Media Literacy and Fake News (10 Viewers)

[Ayo]

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.

 

[JRad]

BTW, what is your basis for saying at worse it's bad vetting?

The way I see it, bad vetting is the very best scenario for ABC.

You know, I typed out something calling it the worst case, but I suppose you’re right. If it came to light this video was vetted, and they still posted it with no “hey this is stock footage”yea that’s for sure worse.

The short version of what I had initially typed out was basically “not vetting your sources is bad journalism”

So yea, I think I agree with your assessment here.

Edit: Also, I just looked at that time stamp, and I really should not have been posting

 

[Beach Friends]

Because there is zero evidence to the contrary. It is 100% fact that it is far-right sites that are pushing that narrative as truth without anything to back it up.

Like I said previously — where is evidence to support the view? I’m happy to see it and change my view with evidence.

All ABC has said on the issue was that it aplogizes "for the error." That's hardly definitive. An error in what, judgment?

I am comfortable with my position that there is no basis for a fact checker to make an affirmative statement that this was merely a mistake.

And there is evidence to the contrary. The film was edited. What we don't know is who edited it and who knew it had been edited.

Too many questions remain open, and ABC's continued silence is suspicious.

 

[Ayo]

Absent any clear information I don’t think anyone should be declaring intent regarding ABC. One way or the other. I know what I think is most likely and abides more closely to Occam’s Razor. But snopes or anyone else probably shouldn’t make a clear allegation of deliberate blame or innocent use.

it was irresponsible at best and a major news organization should be better than this. and the responsibility they take should be explicit, unequivocal, andas public as possible imo

there’s enough skepticism of the legitimate news media that more unnecessary fuel to the fire works even more contrary to the point. It might not be”fair” to News organizations to over correct on something like this. But I think it actually helps the atmosphere of credibility if they did so.

 

[V Chip]

And there is evidence to the contrary. The film was edited. What we don't know is who edited it and who knew it had been edited.

Too many questions remain open, and ABC's continued silence is suspicious.

So in your view since we don’t know who edited it, this means it was a deliberate act by ABC?

What was your opinion on the Seth Dunlap/WWL tweet issue? Did you support the idea that since WWL did not immediately apologize to Dunlap or on air that it must have been a deliberate action on their part? They did their own investigation and weeks after the fact presented their findings.

 

[Beach Friends]

So in your view since we don’t know who edited it, this means it was a deliberate act by ABC?

What was your opinion on the Seth Dunlap/WWL tweet issue? Did you support the idea that since WWL did not immediately apologize to Dunlap or on air that it must have been a deliberate action on their part? They did their own investigation and weeks after the fact presented their findings.

Nope, that's not what I said.

 

[Lazybones]

No you are not. You’ve been shown how to look it up and given links. All you literally have to do is follow a link and read the list.

Not true. The link is to someone’s opinion. I’m very surprised that the page isn’t filled with the lies he puts on Twitter.

I read one of those sensational articles that counted and listed all of his lies.

Included among the list and counted as lies were obvious quips, jokes, off-the-cuff remarks and banter with the press as he was walking to and from the helicopter.

Some White House reporters are dismayed by these "chopper talks."

“They are actually a perfect encapsulation of him: quick hit questions, quick hit answers, lots of give and take,” said one White House reporter. “But they are terrible for reporters. It is impossible to hear, have a substantive dialogue, ask a follow-up question or do any serious pressing of the president. It is a f*****g circus.”

Trump’s ‘chopper talk’ puts media on the defensive

Using Marine One as a backdrop, the White House has replaced formal briefings with impromptu chats where the president sets all the rules.

www.politico.com

It’s crazy to me with as many times as I have heard politicians, media and folks on the internet claim that trump should be booted from twitter because he is spreading lies. That was said in this thread.

Yet crickets.

 

[Lazybones]

Right. When facts no longer matter, call into question the fact-checkers. When fact-checkers don’t back up your opinions, call into question those who check bias of fact-checkers. When that also goes against your opinions, call those bias-checkers, too.

this is about media literacy isn’t it? Are you telling me I shouldn’t vet the fact checkers? That’s the whole point Jim E was making. because their name says fact-check the common public thinks it’s ok and unbiased. I’m sorry if I’m not willing to accept the narrative the Internet puts forth when I am digesting information.

 

[Dragon]

Here is an example of a clear and complete lie on a major news station but no retractions

"If you’re wondering why so many progressives are mourning Bolton’s firing tonight, it’s because Bolton himself fundamentally was a man of the left,"
Carlson said Sept. 10 on his show. "

Tucker Carlson falsely claims Bolton was ‘man of the left’

Fox News host Tucker Carlson celebrated the departure of former national security adviser John Bolton, saying the mustac

www.politifact.com

 

[Lazybones]

I don’t disagree at all with what you are saying here. But if the discussion is related to Snopes having bias based on the headline, I just don’t agree using “mistakingly” in the title is obvious evidence.

I’d have to see how Snopes runs similar articles, or if they even reveal how they choose the titles before jumping to that conclusion. Which, to be honest, I’m not sure I care enough to do as I’m not even sure the last time I went directly to Snopes for anything.

How did they determine it was a mistake?

 

[Lazybones]

Because there is zero evidence to the contrary. It is 100% fact that it is far-right sites that are pushing that narrative as truth without anything to back it up.

Like I said previously — where is evidence to support the view? I’m happy to see it and change my view with evidence.

The evidence is that the story ran. We are not talking about some half cocked website. This is AB freaking C!

 

[Lazybones]

Absent any clear information I don’t think anyone should be declaring intent regarding ABC. One way or the other. I know what I think is most likely and abides more closely to Occam’s Razor. But snopes or anyone else probably shouldn’t make a clear allegation of deliberate blame or innocent use.

it was irresponsible at best and a major news organization should be better than this. and the responsibility they take should be explicit, unequivocal, andas public as possible imo

there’s enough skepticism of the legitimate news media that more unnecessary fuel to the fire works even more contrary to the point. It might not be”fair” to News organizations to over correct on something like this. But I think it actually helps the atmosphere of credibility if they did so.

are you saying the simplest answer is that it was a mistake? I would think just the opposite. (Funny how our brains work)

 

[N.O.Bronco]

The evidence is that the story ran. We are not talking about some half cocked website. This is AB freaking C!

If the right was this interested and dedicated to policing their own news neighborhood, right-wing news would be ushering in a new and unprecedented era of journalistic integrity and investigative reporting.

 

[Lazybones]

Here is an example of a clear and complete lie on a major news station but no retractions

"If you’re wondering why so many progressives are mourning Bolton’s firing tonight, it’s because Bolton himself fundamentally was a man of the left,"
Carlson said Sept. 10 on his show. "

Tucker Carlson falsely claims Bolton was ‘man of the left’

Fox News host Tucker Carlson celebrated the departure of former national security adviser John Bolton, saying the mustac

www.politifact.com

That’s opinion

 

[LA - L.A.]

That’s opinion

This part is not opinion "progressives are mourning Bolton’s firing."

 

[Ayo]

are you saying the simplest answer is that it was a mistake? I would think just the opposite. (Funny how our brains work)

For me, yes. ABC is a pretty well established institution and I think it would be stupid for them to risk using footage like that which could so easily be demonstrated as inauthentic. So it doesn't make sense, to me, for them to take such a foolish risk in doing this knowingly and with deliberately deceptive intent. They also don't strike me as so desperate for ratings and stoking inflammatory fires to resort to something conspiratorial like this. Among other reasons.

That seems pretty straightforward, to me.

 

[V Chip]

The evidence is that the story ran. We are not talking about some half cocked website. This is AB freaking C!

That is not evidence that it was a deliberate misrepresentation.

If airing/reporting things that require retractions is tantamount to deliberately reporting false information, there's a lot of news organizations who do that. Mistakes are possible, especially in the day of getting videos from outside sources. Poor vetting <> deliberately misleading.

 

[Lazybones]

This part is not opinion "progressives are mourning Bolton’s firing."

Kinda like saying water is wet. Though true in many circumstances, the statement is not factual.

 

[V Chip]

If the right was this interested and dedicated to policing their own news neighborhood, right-wing news would be ushering in a new and unprecedented era of journalistic integrity and investigative reporting.

Right-wing news would not even exist, at least not as it does now.