Media Literacy and Fake News (1 Viewer)

[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.

 

[CoolBrees]

Yeah, that isn’t the same.

The guy I was commenting on said he was a PoC woman refugee and had been posting as such for years. He was found out because he had a history that was compared to his actually identity He was pretending to be a women so he could give credence to his ridiculous opinions about women and refugees.

This angle doesn’t help your cancel culture thing. These are the people that should be canceled to ya know use the parlance of our times. If you can’t make salient arguments as a white guy; pretending to be a PoC doesn’t make your opinion right. It just gives the illusions of experience that you didn’t have. It’s bullshirt

 

[Ayo]

Just totally weird. White male college professor builds an entire fake Twitter persona, pretending to be an immigrant woman of color, in order to trash feminism, diversity, BLM. There’s a lot going on here.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article246257250.html

 

[MT15]

Maybe with the cancel culture being all the rage right now with the left (I know, save your screeching, I know the right does it as well, just not nearly on the same level) it kind of a sad statement that a professor has to try and hide his identify in order to have the ability to speak freely.
No, I don't know what he said as his alter ego, and I don't care. Because it wouldn't matter.
This past week, a professor wrote an article explaining why college football/athletics were a good thing for America, especially in this strange time. Why, because it brings all of us together. You know sports. He pulled a full on Drew Brees and wrote this:
https://www.insidehighered.com/view...e-higher-ed-article-he-recently-wrote-opinion

I wonder if he will be able to keep his job or will be forced to move from one crappy paying job to crappy paying job?

Im thinking you kinda missed the point. He pretended to be a woman and an immigrant and a person of color in order to give his anti-immigrant, anti-woman, antI-BLM views more credibility. This is sick, IMO, he should be able to own his own crappy views and not hide behind some fake persona.

 

[LA - L.A.]

Im thinking you kinda missed the point. He pretended to be a woman and an immigrant and a person of color in order to give his anti-immigrant, anti-woman, antI-BLM views more credibility. This is sick, IMO, he should be able to own his own crappy views and not hide behind some fake persona.

Exactly, this isn't a case of someone being anonymous, which he could have easily been. This was a case of someone intentionally lying about who they are to try to give themselves more credibility.

 

[Farb]

Im thinking you kinda missed the point. He pretended to be a woman and an immigrant and a person of color in order to give his anti-immigrant, anti-woman, antI-BLM views more credibility. This is sick, IMO, he should be able to own his own crappy views and not hide behind some fake persona.

I agree, but you and I and obviously this dude, knows that is not the case in this day and age. You can't be anonymous, especially as a person in a left institution such as academia when there is a huge push to 'dox' people who you don't agree with. Look no further than this thread. It is sick that someone can't express their views without the fear of being ruined in real life because you don't agree with the mob.

 

[MT15]

Once again, he isn’t being threatened with ruin because of his views, and not at all at this point in time. We have no idea who he is, or whether he has tenure or not. You are presuming a lot of things that haven’t happened.

He may be in trouble because of his rank dishonesty, because academia prizes honesty. He should have never created a fake and false identity in order to push his views as being more legitimate. It’s a bit like faking data to create the result you were looking for.

He could have presented his views anonymously as just another white man, and he wouldn’t have drawn any of this attention. The fact that he pretended to speak as someone that he is not is the real story.

 

[CoolBrees]

Exactly. Techno fog gives out all kinds ridiculous points. Whoever that is shouldn’t be outed. They are anonymous and not pretending be someone they are not.

This guy made up a person specifically to be able to make points from a perspective that wasn’t his. And he is in a profession where truth is the ultimate goal.

 

[CoolBrees]

So Turning Points got slapped down today. Seems as though they were quietly funding and staffing Rally Forge to make it look like an actual movement. Oops

Facebook bans firm behind Turning Point's election troll farm

Facebook said it removed 200 Facebook accounts, 55 pages and 76 Instagram accounts tied to Rally Forge.

www.politico.com

 

[Ayo]

especially as a person in a left institution such as academia when there is a huge push to 'dox' people who you don't agree with

there is a lot of progressive thought in the humanities in postsecondary institutions, yes. On the one hand, it's sort of how the system is designed and has been since its inception

and yes, there can be unfair, undue pressure. I've been subjected to it myself. Not neo Marxist enough (or at all). Not afro centrist enough. Not feminist enough.

But to act like the university is some monolithic bastion of leftist philosophy isn't correct. There are entire disciplines and departments, not to mention administration, that are definitely NOT as liberal or progressive. If at all. In fact, a lot of university administration is leftover, stale business ideologies that contradict what those institutions are actually teaching in their classrooms at that time.

I just had a former student reach out to me. He's in Commerce at a premier institution here and said his Management of Work and Teams course includes a lot of our work on diversity and inclusion. And yet the actual university is run like a 1980s company. It's weird.

Not to mention I think you're making a rather unqualified statement when you say there's a "huge push to dox people you don't agree with." Does it happen? Sure, obviously. Is there some "huge push" in the sense of some coordinated, broadscale effort?

Not even close.

 

[LA - L.A.]

there is a lot of progressive thought in the humanities in postsecondary institutions, yes. On the one hand, it's sort of how the system is designed and has been since its inception

and yes, there can be unfair, undue pressure. I've been subjected to it myself. Not neo Marxist enough (or at all). Not afro centrist enough. Not feminist enough.

But to act like the university is some monolithic bastion of leftist philosophy isn't correct. There are entire disciplines and departments, not to mention administration, that are definitely NOT as liberal or progressive. If at all. In fact, a lot of university administration is leftover, stale business ideologies that contradict what those institutions are actually teaching in their classrooms at that time.

I just had a former student reach out to me. He's in Commerce at a premier institution here and said his Management of Work and Teams course includes a lot of our work on diversity and inclusion. And yet the actual university is run like a 1980s company. It's weird.

Not to mention I think you're making a rather unqualified statement when you say there's a "huge push to dox people you don't agree with." Does it happen? Sure, obviously. Is there some "huge push" in the sense of some coordinated, broadscale effort?

Not even close.

It seems that a lot of people forget that MBA programs are a part of all of those institutions.

 

[Farb]

there is a lot of progressive thought in the humanities in postsecondary institutions, yes. On the one hand, it's sort of how the system is designed and has been since its inception

and yes, there can be unfair, undue pressure. I've been subjected to it myself. Not neo Marxist enough (or at all). Not afro centrist enough. Not feminist enough.

But to act like the university is some monolithic bastion of leftist philosophy isn't correct. There are entire disciplines and departments, not to mention administration, that are definitely NOT as liberal or progressive. If at all. In fact, a lot of university administration is leftover, stale business ideologies that contradict what those institutions are actually teaching in their classrooms at that time.

I am sure there are still conservatives sprinkled about on campuses. I think of them like practicing Catholics in Europe after the Protestant alteration in the 16th. Meeting in secret, by candle light, making sure no one is following, reverently unrolling the MAGA tapestry for worship.
I know it is not really like that. It is funny to picture though.
Although, I would guess not much different from a lot of the conversation I have had with those in academia. I will say that I have noticed that left leaning instructors tend to deny it happens at all and right leaning ones almost speak in hushed voices. I will admit, that my sample size is minuscule to yours, but I think the sheer amount of liberal/democrats compared to conservatives/republicans faculty would at least lead some support in my overall statement on this.

Not to mention I think you're making a rather unqualified statement when you say there's a "huge push to dox people you don't agree with." Does it happen? Sure, obviously. Is there some "huge push" in the sense of some coordinated, broadscale effort?

Not even close.

I will have to disagree on this one. I can't comment on if there are actual organizations who job it is to do this, but there are enough amateurs out there that are good at it. There are organization that monitor and then attack sponsors of certain shows and events. I think that is more by design by big corp than anything to allow them to virtue signal for $$.

To me, doxing is nothing more than private censorship. I don't think censorship should be supported in any form. I also think that most people are smart enough to make up their own minds so I don't see a need to 'protect' people from different thoughts or perspective, no matter how 'hurtful' words may be interpreted by the listener. The move to silence people that someone does not agree with is very concerning to me but other feel it more important to protect some idiot who get too excited when he/she hears Duke or Farrakhan speak.

I think if we can get back to policing our own (sake of argument: Conservatives/Liberals) and call 'crazy' crazy on our own side instead of trying so desperately to police the other side, that would aid a lot in bring back civility to our national discussions. Right now, we have too many people that let 'words' actually hurt them. It is nearly impossible to have a actual discussion when you start at the clutching pearls starting point. It is stupid.

Sorry for the rant Ayo.

 

[Ayo]

I am sure there are still conservatives sprinkled about on campuses. I think of them like practicing Catholics in Europe after the Protestant alteration in the 16th. Meeting in secret, by candle light, making sure no one is following, reverently unrolling the MAGA tapestry for worship.

I know it is not really like that. It is funny to picture though..

I like the analogy and the humor - sincerely. Appreciate it.

I'll just add that it's much more than a "sprinkling." In some disciplines, and particularly administration, it's quite pervasive.

Although, I would guess not much different from a lot of the conversation I have had with those in academia. I will say that I have noticed that left leaning instructors tend to deny it happens at all and right leaning ones almost speak in hushed voices. I will admit, that my sample size is minuscule to yours, but I think the sheer amount of liberal/democrats compared to conservatives/republicans faculty would at least lead some support in my overall statement on this.

I don't know the academics you speak to, so it's hard for me to align my perspective to it. I was amidst a lot of very left leaning, much moreso than I am left, so I have seen a lot of it. But I've also been in Engineering and Economics departments and have friends and colleagues in administration, in addition to seeing university policy. It's definitely not a sprinkling in my experience.

But like I said, I have no problem with saying that universities are predominately populated by more liberal people - and, as I said, it's been that way for a really long time. Since their inception, even before the USA existed.

And I'm not denying that there are people who probably 'hide' their ideas. In fact, I had a colleague come to me a couple of days ago and gave me a scenario, asking "Was that racist of me?" I'll spare you the incident, but she had said something that I thought was totally fair and reasonable and professional. I definitely didn't think it was offensive. But the other person thought it was and started lecturing her on how to be an ally.

We are in different departments, but the colleague asked me because I work in this area and am reasonable and professional and not an extremist (I know... I can already imagine what you must think of my workplace now lol), and she said that she was made to feel bad about her answer and herself and she was probably just going to avoid this other person.

That's not healthy for a workplace. And I would never declare that it doesn't happen or isn't harmful when it does.

I think if we can get back to policing our own (sake of argument: Conservatives/Liberals) and call 'crazy' crazy on our own side instead of trying so desperately to police the other side, that would aid a lot in bring back civility to our national discussions. Right now, we have too many people that let 'words' actually hurt them. It is nearly impossible to have a actual discussion when you start at the clutching pearls starting point. It is stupid.

Sorry for the rant Ayo.

I think that's a reasonable take. Actually, I think that would be pretty constructive.

But we aren't always aware of when that's needed on our side - and that's something I know I can improve on, generally. At work, I think I do a pretty good job of this, but I am seen as more centered and moderate so it's easier.

When I talk to friends back home and I'm the super duper flaming liberal commie socialist hippie, it's harder to do when there are fellow SDFLCSHs around

And never apologize for a rant. I love and adore rants. My favorite comedians are sublime ranters. I imagine myself a somewhat above average ranter.

"I can rant as well as thou!" - Hamlet

no apology necessary, my dude

 

[Farb]

I think that's a reasonable take. Actually, I think that would be pretty constructive.

But we aren't always aware of when that's needed on our side -

I did not think of that, and I would agree. Good point.

and the "SDFLSCH" thing.....that is gold. Thanks for that and I might borrow that in future posts, with credit of course.

 

[CoolBrees]

@Farb

I think most of us agree, at least I think so, that outing someone who is anonymous on the internet is a bad practice at best and downright vitriolic at worst. People have been killed or committed suicide once outed on the web.

I think this is somewhere we can find common ground. But when you elevate a person who is crawfishing and working to persuade opinion based on a completely fabricated person-that’s where you lose me.

I don’t think it is productive in any circumstance to impersonate someone. Impersonating a police officer is illegal. Impersonating a doctor is illegal. And so on.

we aren’t ever going to get to a place where we can have a dialogue as a nation or individuals until we can trust that what the person or institution is telling us is the truth. We won’t even begin to get there at all until we call out imposters from every side of every debate. Not uninformed or even trolls. No those who deceive with intention to sway opinion under the guise of legitimacy need to be impugned.

 

[MT15]

Something that has been going on for years, and not uncommonly, evidently.

 

[SaintForLife]

CNN's legal analyst making CNN proud...or maybe not

 

[MT15]

How is this fake news? This doesn’t belong in this thread.

 

[MT15]

This is something that needs to be publicized. People have a right to know the source of what they are reading, it seems to me. If it is paid for by political parties or lobbyists then it should be labeled as such.