Disparagingly, perhaps, but consistent with recent trends, ‘misinformation’ has been announced as Dictionary.com’s 2018 Word of the Year. This selection comes on the heels of the Oxford English Dictionary’s selection of ‘post truth’ as its 2016 Word of the Year. The profusion of false information, including fake news, unfounded political memes and conspiracy narratives, into the media ecosystem, largely through social media and other online sources, poses a growing threat to individuals and society.
A Threat To Society
The threat can be summarised thus: If the factual basis on which democratic governance rests is not reliable, then citizens have little recourse when collective decisions are at stake (e.g., presidential elections, votes to remain or leave the EU) except to guess or base decisions on rumors or bad information. This is when cynicism, apathy and acquiescence to populist or authoritarian leaders with simple answers takes hold, and democracy seems too messy, contested or complicated to follow.
While it is difficult to demonstrate causality, the rise of social media coincides with an alarming erosion of strong support for democracy among younger voters in the US and Western Europe (who have also grown up without fascism or an authoritarian regime posing an existential threat).
For solutions to public information problems, we often turn to media literacy efforts. But recommendations to improve media literacy are too idealistic in their ambition to be of much use – and can even backfire, as technology researcher danah boyd argues. Literacy schemes ask media audiences to not only be critical consumers of information and arbiters of truth amid competing claims but also creative and thoughtful content generators; in other words, to become journalists themselves.
For solutions to public information problems, we often turn to media literacy efforts. But recommendations to improve media literacy are too idealistic in their ambition to be of much use.
Comprehensive plans to make audiences more media literate also assume an urgent need to understand and engage with the latest social media platforms and digital apps while appreciating concepts like agenda-setting, news framing, cultivation and third person effects, not to mention confirmation bias, echo chambers and filter bubbles; in other words, to take a scholarly interest in media.
At the same time, technology users are cautioned to be on their guard against hack attacks, phishing scams, privacy incursions, fake news, disinformation campaigns, and computational propaganda – and to develop the technical skills and cognitive resources necessary to still derive value from the information sphere; in other words, to engage with online media with hacker-level expertise.
A New Information Order Is Emerging
Any one of these efforts is a tall order for the typical user, perhaps even the holder of a college degree in journalism, media studies or communication, which most of the population does not possess. Nevertheless, a new – and scary – information order is emerging out there, one no longer primarily fact-based and grounded in shared truth but strategically intended to confuse, outrage and emotionally manipulate, as outlined in a new report by the LSE Truth, Trust, and Technology Commission.
Similar to warnings about global warming, the ‘information crisis’ identified by the commission is not merely looming or years off in the future but is upon us now. The report amplifies concerns aired by the Council of Europe’s 2017 report on ‘Information Disorder’ and reflects priorities shared by the European Commission’s independent high level group on fake news and online disinformation, as well as the newly launched Trust and Technology Initiative at the University of Cambridge.
We tend to overlook the obvious, foundational question undergirding informed citizenship: Do most citizens have a developed enough understanding of mainstream media operations.
Amid concerns about technology’s role in sowing confusion and duping users into becoming unwitting accomplices in the spread of “fake news” and misinformation through social media likes and shares, we tend to overlook the obvious, foundational question undergirding informed citizenship: Do most citizens have a developed enough understanding of mainstream media operations and practices to draw on a personal bank of news knowledge when assessing (imposter) sources and (suspect) content?
Findings from the RISJ’s 2018 Digital News Report surveying respondents in the US, Europe, Canada, and Australia indicate that news knowledge is quite dispersed across countries, and that a relatively small percentage of survey respondents qualify as news experts. My own research comparing low to high knowledge-holding groups consistently shows that at higher levels of news knowledge, users can much more easily identify fake news and even native advertising (online ads or promotions that look like news reports) and are much less inclined to “like” or share suspect content.
Press Knowledge As The Weapon Against Bullshit and Misinformation
Knowing how news is constructed and mainstream media operate provides the internal scaffolding for “bullshit detection” and increases motivation to engage with legitimate sources. Indeed, respondents with increased knowledge about the workings of the press consume news from a wider range of sources and rely on a broader range of credibility cues when deciding whether to click through to a story than those with lower levels of news literacy.
A proactive plan to enhance media knowledge in the electorate begins with new requirements in secondary and college-level courses to study the free press as a central and foundational institution in democratic systems.
Deciphering fact from fiction and attempts to persuade, rather than inform, is an increasingly complex task when the burden of verification devolves onto the individual, as is often the case in digital environments. But fake news can only go so far if users are equipped with procedural knowledge of how hard news fundamentally differs from opinion and assertion – and recognise politically motivated tropes for what they are.
A proactive plan to enhance media knowledge in the electorate begins with new requirements in secondary and college-level courses to study the free press as a central and foundational institution in democratic systems. But formal classes are not enough. Nor are think tank and commission reports, gatherings of industry leaders, or commentaries in press blogs. Quality media education must be accessible to the public at nominal cost and led by instructors who are free from bias but committed to communicating the news media’s constitutive role in society.
By reducing demand for baseless content, press knowledge can help turn back the rising tide of misinformation, but only if we take a more hands-on approach to educating citizens about the actual workings of the mainstream media.
You might also be interested in Charlie Beckett’s What Is ‘Quality’ Journalism?
Opinions expressed on this website are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views, policies or positions of the EJO.
Sign up for the EJO’s regular monthly newsletter or follow us on Facebook and Twitter.
Procedural News Knowledge: The Overlooked Pillar Of Informed Citizenship
December 3, 2018 • Comment, Research • by Erik P. Bucy
© US National Archives, 1957. Public Domain.
Disparagingly, perhaps, but consistent with recent trends, ‘misinformation’ has been announced as Dictionary.com’s 2018 Word of the Year. This selection comes on the heels of the Oxford English Dictionary’s selection of ‘post truth’ as its 2016 Word of the Year. The profusion of false information, including fake news, unfounded political memes and conspiracy narratives, into the media ecosystem, largely through social media and other online sources, poses a growing threat to individuals and society.
A Threat To Society
The threat can be summarised thus: If the factual basis on which democratic governance rests is not reliable, then citizens have little recourse when collective decisions are at stake (e.g., presidential elections, votes to remain or leave the EU) except to guess or base decisions on rumors or bad information. This is when cynicism, apathy and acquiescence to populist or authoritarian leaders with simple answers takes hold, and democracy seems too messy, contested or complicated to follow.
While it is difficult to demonstrate causality, the rise of social media coincides with an alarming erosion of strong support for democracy among younger voters in the US and Western Europe (who have also grown up without fascism or an authoritarian regime posing an existential threat).
For solutions to public information problems, we often turn to media literacy efforts. But recommendations to improve media literacy are too idealistic in their ambition to be of much use – and can even backfire, as technology researcher danah boyd argues. Literacy schemes ask media audiences to not only be critical consumers of information and arbiters of truth amid competing claims but also creative and thoughtful content generators; in other words, to become journalists themselves.
For solutions to public information problems, we often turn to media literacy efforts. But recommendations to improve media literacy are too idealistic in their ambition to be of much use.
Comprehensive plans to make audiences more media literate also assume an urgent need to understand and engage with the latest social media platforms and digital apps while appreciating concepts like agenda-setting, news framing, cultivation and third person effects, not to mention confirmation bias, echo chambers and filter bubbles; in other words, to take a scholarly interest in media.
At the same time, technology users are cautioned to be on their guard against hack attacks, phishing scams, privacy incursions, fake news, disinformation campaigns, and computational propaganda – and to develop the technical skills and cognitive resources necessary to still derive value from the information sphere; in other words, to engage with online media with hacker-level expertise.
A New Information Order Is Emerging
Any one of these efforts is a tall order for the typical user, perhaps even the holder of a college degree in journalism, media studies or communication, which most of the population does not possess. Nevertheless, a new – and scary – information order is emerging out there, one no longer primarily fact-based and grounded in shared truth but strategically intended to confuse, outrage and emotionally manipulate, as outlined in a new report by the LSE Truth, Trust, and Technology Commission.
Similar to warnings about global warming, the ‘information crisis’ identified by the commission is not merely looming or years off in the future but is upon us now. The report amplifies concerns aired by the Council of Europe’s 2017 report on ‘Information Disorder’ and reflects priorities shared by the European Commission’s independent high level group on fake news and online disinformation, as well as the newly launched Trust and Technology Initiative at the University of Cambridge.
We tend to overlook the obvious, foundational question undergirding informed citizenship: Do most citizens have a developed enough understanding of mainstream media operations.
Amid concerns about technology’s role in sowing confusion and duping users into becoming unwitting accomplices in the spread of “fake news” and misinformation through social media likes and shares, we tend to overlook the obvious, foundational question undergirding informed citizenship: Do most citizens have a developed enough understanding of mainstream media operations and practices to draw on a personal bank of news knowledge when assessing (imposter) sources and (suspect) content?
Findings from the RISJ’s 2018 Digital News Report surveying respondents in the US, Europe, Canada, and Australia indicate that news knowledge is quite dispersed across countries, and that a relatively small percentage of survey respondents qualify as news experts. My own research comparing low to high knowledge-holding groups consistently shows that at higher levels of news knowledge, users can much more easily identify fake news and even native advertising (online ads or promotions that look like news reports) and are much less inclined to “like” or share suspect content.
Press Knowledge As The Weapon Against Bullshit and Misinformation
Knowing how news is constructed and mainstream media operate provides the internal scaffolding for “bullshit detection” and increases motivation to engage with legitimate sources. Indeed, respondents with increased knowledge about the workings of the press consume news from a wider range of sources and rely on a broader range of credibility cues when deciding whether to click through to a story than those with lower levels of news literacy.
A proactive plan to enhance media knowledge in the electorate begins with new requirements in secondary and college-level courses to study the free press as a central and foundational institution in democratic systems.
Deciphering fact from fiction and attempts to persuade, rather than inform, is an increasingly complex task when the burden of verification devolves onto the individual, as is often the case in digital environments. But fake news can only go so far if users are equipped with procedural knowledge of how hard news fundamentally differs from opinion and assertion – and recognise politically motivated tropes for what they are.
A proactive plan to enhance media knowledge in the electorate begins with new requirements in secondary and college-level courses to study the free press as a central and foundational institution in democratic systems. But formal classes are not enough. Nor are think tank and commission reports, gatherings of industry leaders, or commentaries in press blogs. Quality media education must be accessible to the public at nominal cost and led by instructors who are free from bias but committed to communicating the news media’s constitutive role in society.
By reducing demand for baseless content, press knowledge can help turn back the rising tide of misinformation, but only if we take a more hands-on approach to educating citizens about the actual workings of the mainstream media.
You might also be interested in Charlie Beckett’s What Is ‘Quality’ Journalism?
Opinions expressed on this website are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views, policies or positions of the EJO.
Sign up for the EJO’s regular monthly newsletter or follow us on Facebook and Twitter.
Tags: disinformation, fake news, Journalism, knowledge, media, Media Education, Media Literacy, Misinformation, News consumption, Press knowledge, Propaganda, trust, Trust in Media, truth
About the Author
Erik P. Bucy
Related Posts
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in...
Misinformation: why it may not necessarily lead to...
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
How games, TikTok and fake fact-checking sites became...
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact of investigative...
October 22, 2023
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power of investigative...
September 13, 2023
The impact of competing tech regulations in the EU, US...
September 12, 2023
Enough ‘doomer’ news! How ‘solutions journalism’ can turn climate anxiety...
August 31, 2023
Student perspective: How Western media embraced TikTok to reach Gen...
August 19, 2023
Lessons from Spain: Why outlets need to unite to make...
July 26, 2023
INTERVIEW: Self-censorship and untold stories in Uganda
June 23, 2023
Student Perspective: Job insecurity at the root of poor mental...
June 9, 2023
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in Central and...
June 1, 2023
Opinion: Why Poland’s rise on the Press Freedom Index is...
May 17, 2023
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping the debate...
April 25, 2023
Student perspective: Supporting the journalists who face hopelessness, trauma and...
April 13, 2023
Interview: Why young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina feel they...
March 29, 2023
Humanitarian reporting: Why coverage of the Turkey and Syria earthquakes...
March 8, 2023
How women journalists in Burkina Faso are making a difference...
January 11, 2023
Dispelling the ‘green’ AI myth: the true environmental cost of...
December 29, 2022
New publication highlights the importance of the Black press in...
December 12, 2022
The enduring press freedom challenge: how Japan’s exclusive press clubs...
September 26, 2022
How Journalism is joining forces with AI to fight online...
September 14, 2022
How cash deals between big tech and Australian news outlets...
September 1, 2022
Panel debate: Should journalists be activists?
August 19, 2022
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
August 9, 2022
Interview: Are social media platforms helping or hindering the mandate...
July 15, 2022
Policy brief from UNESCO recommends urgent interventions to protect quality...
July 5, 2022
EJO’s statement on Ukraine
February 28, 2022
Study shows European mainstream media ignore humanitarian crises in the...
May 22, 2024
Journalism students see an industry in crisis. It’s time to...
April 18, 2024
Interview: How a summer school is sowing seeds for strong...
March 14, 2024
AI advances have left news publishers fearing for their business...
February 23, 2024
Big comeback for organisation providing invaluable networks to journalism students
January 31, 2024
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact of investigative...
October 22, 2023
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power of investigative...
September 13, 2023
The impact of competing tech regulations in the EU, US...
September 12, 2023
Enough ‘doomer’ news! How ‘solutions journalism’ can turn climate anxiety...
August 31, 2023
Student perspective: How Western media embraced TikTok to reach Gen...
August 19, 2023
Lessons from Spain: Why outlets need to unite to make...
July 26, 2023
INTERVIEW: Self-censorship and untold stories in Uganda
June 23, 2023
Student Perspective: Job insecurity at the root of poor mental...
June 9, 2023
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in Central and...
June 1, 2023
Opinion: Why Poland’s rise on the Press Freedom Index is...
May 17, 2023
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping the debate...
April 25, 2023
Student perspective: Supporting the journalists who face hopelessness, trauma and...
April 13, 2023
Interview: Why young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina feel they...
March 29, 2023
Humanitarian reporting: Why coverage of the Turkey and Syria earthquakes...
March 8, 2023
How women journalists in Burkina Faso are making a difference...
January 11, 2023
Dispelling the ‘green’ AI myth: the true environmental cost of...
December 29, 2022
New publication highlights the importance of the Black press in...
December 12, 2022
The enduring press freedom challenge: how Japan’s exclusive press clubs...
September 26, 2022
How Journalism is joining forces with AI to fight online...
September 14, 2022
How cash deals between big tech and Australian news outlets...
September 1, 2022
Panel debate: Should journalists be activists?
August 19, 2022
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
August 9, 2022
Interview: Are social media platforms helping or hindering the mandate...
July 15, 2022
Policy brief from UNESCO recommends urgent interventions to protect quality...
July 5, 2022
EJO’s statement on Ukraine
February 28, 2022
13 Things Newspapers Can Learn From Buzzfeed
April 10, 2015
How Data Journalism Is Taught In Europe
January 19, 2016
Why Journalism Needs Scientists (Now)
May 13, 2017
Digitalisation: Changing The Relationship Between Public Relations And Journalism
August 6, 2015
The Lemon Dealers
June 27, 2007
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact of investigative...
October 22, 2023
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power of investigative...
September 13, 2023
The impact of competing tech regulations in the EU, US...
September 12, 2023
Enough ‘doomer’ news! How ‘solutions journalism’ can turn climate anxiety...
August 31, 2023
Student perspective: How Western media embraced TikTok to reach Gen...
August 19, 2023
Lessons from Spain: Why outlets need to unite to make...
July 26, 2023
INTERVIEW: Self-censorship and untold stories in Uganda
June 23, 2023
Student Perspective: Job insecurity at the root of poor mental...
June 9, 2023
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in Central and...
June 1, 2023
Opinion: Why Poland’s rise on the Press Freedom Index is...
May 17, 2023
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping the debate...
April 25, 2023
Student perspective: Supporting the journalists who face hopelessness, trauma and...
April 13, 2023
Interview: Why young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina feel they...
March 29, 2023
Humanitarian reporting: Why coverage of the Turkey and Syria earthquakes...
March 8, 2023
How women journalists in Burkina Faso are making a difference...
January 11, 2023
Dispelling the ‘green’ AI myth: the true environmental cost of...
December 29, 2022
New publication highlights the importance of the Black press in...
December 12, 2022
The enduring press freedom challenge: how Japan’s exclusive press clubs...
September 26, 2022
How Journalism is joining forces with AI to fight online...
September 14, 2022
How cash deals between big tech and Australian news outlets...
September 1, 2022
Panel debate: Should journalists be activists?
August 19, 2022
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
August 9, 2022
Interview: Are social media platforms helping or hindering the mandate...
July 15, 2022
Policy brief from UNESCO recommends urgent interventions to protect quality...
July 5, 2022
EJO’s statement on Ukraine
February 28, 2022
Game Change: US Journalism Shows Signs of Renewal
April 1, 2014
Media Struck by Hunting Fever
February 2, 2012
Engaged journalism takes off in Romania
December 20, 2019
Mobile News for Women with Tattoos. Watson.ch Goes Live
March 14, 2014
Terrorist? Patriot? How US Media Cover Rightwing Extremism
January 27, 2016
Operated by
Funded by
Newsletter
Find us on Facebook
Archives
Links