tag:theconversation.com,2011:/global/topics/fact-checking-7041/articlesFact-checking – The Conversation2023-11-09T13:35:21Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2168812023-11-09T13:35:21Z2023-11-09T13:35:21ZPeople dig deeper to fact-check social media posts when paired with someone who doesn’t share their perspective – new research<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/557913/original/file-20231106-17-n1jqco.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=83%2C114%2C6532%2C4511&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Joining up with someone who holds a different perspective influences your take on online posts.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/young-woman-using-mobile-phone-in-the-coffee-shop-royalty-free-image/1470012550">Frazao Studio Latino/E+ via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>People fact-checked social media posts more carefully and were more willing to revise their initial beliefs when they were paired with someone from a different cultural background than their own, according to a study my collaborators <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=YtF6xwMAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Michael Baker</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=FOyLCpwAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Françoise Détienne</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=2W7uROIAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">I</a> recently published in <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1295130/abstract">Frontiers in Psychology</a>.</p>
<p>If you’re French, you’re less likely than an English person to believe a tweet that claims Britain produces <a href="https://x.com/thetimes/status/758297392533889025?s=20">more varieties of cheese</a> than France. And if you’re English, you’re more likely than a French person to believe a tweet that claims only <a href="https://x.com/TheLocalFrance/status/603789583470469120?s=20">43% of French people shower daily</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"758297392533889025"}"></div></p>
<p>More intriguingly, when pairs of English and French people fact-checked such tweets together, how they did so and the extent to which they revised their initial beliefs depended on whether they were “matched” or “mismatched” for cultural identity. We found French-French and English-English pairs focused on confirming evidence and stuck to their initial beliefs, whereas English-French pairs engaged in deeper searches and revised their beliefs in line with evidence.</p>
<h2>Why it matters</h2>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/i-went-down-the-rabbit-hole-to-debunk-misinformation-heres-what-i-learned-about-big-ben-and-online-information-overload-154923">Misinformation on social media</a> is one of the greatest challenges of our time. It contributes to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4586">political polarization</a>, affects people’s <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008">voting, vaccination and recycling</a> behavior, and is often <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-018-9443-y">believed long after it’s been corrected</a>.</p>
<p>In recent weeks, misinformation about the Israel-Hamas war has reached <a href="https://www.cip.uw.edu/2023/10/20/new-elites-twitter-x-most-influential-accounts-hamas-israel/">unprecedented levels</a> and is fanning ethnic, religious and <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-17/israel-hamas-war-is-stoking-tensions-in-europe-where-communities-are-on-edge#xj4y7vzkg">political tensions worldwide</a> – including on <a href="https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-college-free-speech-543aff623d5f54ad6529fe598ae48271">U.S. campuses</a>. </p>
<p>To address the misinformation challenge, researchers need to understand better how people process online information. In addition to contributing to such understanding, our findings suggest that bringing together people from opposing sides to fact-check contentious social media posts might improve their media literacy and their ability to engage in civil discourse.</p>
<p>Bringing together people from opposing sides of a conflict to jointly fact-check social media posts isn’t likely to be easy. In times like these, it’s hard even to get them into the same room to speak directly to each other rather than <a href="https://twitter.com/ZZZZZZZZZZZack/status/1714755322798117269">hurling slogans</a> – <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/12/nyregion/columbia-university-israel-hamas-protests.html">and worse</a> – at each other. Nevertheless, because publicly funded educational institutions are committed to promoting informed debate and preparing the nation’s future citizens, my colleagues and I believe they remain some of the most <a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/news/students/free-speech/2023/10/20/campus-leaders-promote-open-dialogue-israel-hamas-war">promising places to try</a> this approach.</p>
<h2>What’s next</h2>
<p>In future studies, we plan to focus on topics that are more controversial than cheese or personal hygiene to see whether the moderating effect of mismatched pairs still applies.</p>
<p>For example, we could present Israeli and Palestinian pairs with social media posts about the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ahli_Arab_Hospital_explosion">explosion at the al-Ahli hospital on Oct. 27, 2023</a> - an event so contentious that The New York Times is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/03/briefing/gaza-hospital-explosion.html">still struggling to explain</a> its <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/23/gaza-hospital-new-york-times-00122986">initial attribution</a> of the explosion to an Israeli bomb rather than an Islamic Jihad missile.</p>
<p>Observing how matched and mismatched pairs fact-check such posts would shed light on how a tweet’s contentiousness affects people’s ability to fact-check it effectively. In particular, when the stakes are higher with regard to people’s identities, do mismatched pairs still outperform matched pairs, or does the content’s contentiousness obstruct effective collaboration?</p>
<h2>How we do our work</h2>
<p>Much misinformation research has focused on <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11100460">who believes it</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559">how it spreads</a>. Few studies have examined the actual <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104395">processes by which people assess</a> what they read online.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"603789583470469120"}"></div></p>
<p>Our approach to studying people’s deliberations about online information is to create experimental situations in which such deliberations are natural and observable. In this study, we designed a novel research setup based on the fact that sharing and discussing social media posts with others is an everyday activity.</p>
<p><em>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/research-brief-83231">Research Brief</a> is a short take on interesting academic work.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/216881/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Eli Gottlieb does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A new study unexpectedly found a way to help people assess social media posts with less bias and more care – pairing them up with partners who have a different perspective.Eli Gottlieb, Senior Fellow in Education and Human Development, George Washington UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2072112023-08-29T01:06:49Z2023-08-29T01:06:49ZTo stop hoaxes on WhatsApp, Line and Telegram, fact-checking must go beyond social media<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/543924/original/file-20230822-27-ztla0a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=19%2C39%2C6597%2C4375&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/extreme-close-female-finger-using-digital-1027541557">Bits And Splits/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>This article is part of our #FightHoax2024 series.</em></p>
<p>Ahead of Indonesia’s 2024 general election, fact checks in Indonesia are expected to save the public from misinformation.</p>
<p>Media organisations and activists in Indonesia still heavily <a href="https://time.com/5567287/social-media-indonesia-elections-kawal-pemilu/">focus on social media</a> for fact-checking activities to eradicate misinformation.</p>
<p>This is understandable, given social media is still <a href="https://weblama.amsi.or.id/download/research-report-fact-check-audience-in-indonesia-2022/">the platform used the most</a> by the public to access fact-check contents and to clarify any news they see. Not to mention that <a href="https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2022-06/Digital_News-Report_2022.pdf">most mobile phone users (68%)</a> in Indonesia turn to social media to access information.</p>
<p>Yet we seem to almost forget that our personal conversations can also contribute to the spread of false information.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/1253240/indonesia-leading-android-social-media-apps-by-monthly-hours-used/">A report</a> by the Indonesian Anti-Slander Society (MAFINDO) on the spread of misinformation in Indonesia has placed WhatsApp – currently the <a href="https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1144489/whatsapp-users-in-indonesia">most popular communication app</a> in the country – as a platform for spreading <a href="https://www.mafindo.or.id/blog/2022/03/07/when-politics-and-religion-become-disaster-an-annual-mapping-of-hoax-in-indonesia/">misinformation</a>.</p>
<p>My <a href="https://weblama.amsi.or.id/download/research-report-fact-check-audience-in-indonesia-2022/">latest research</a>, which I conducted with my research team from the Digital Journalism Department at the Multimedia Nusantara University (UMN) in Indonesia, shows people rarely refer to messaging apps as their main source for finding facts.</p>
<p>Maybe it is the time for Indonesian press and fact-check communities to intensify their fact-checking dissemination strategy by targeting instant messaging apps, like Whatsapp, Line and Telegram.</p>
<h2>Misinformation in personal messaging apps</h2>
<p>The Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism’s <a href="https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2021-06/Digital_News_Report_2021_FINAL.pdf">Digital News Report 2021</a> shows that the people of Global South, including Indonesia, considers WhatsApp a medium for spreading misinformation.</p>
<p>This means our instant messaging activities are not really safe from hoaxes.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530507/original/file-20230607-15-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/530507/original/file-20230607-15-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530507/original/file-20230607-15-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530507/original/file-20230607-15-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530507/original/file-20230607-15-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530507/original/file-20230607-15-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/530507/original/file-20230607-15-jn50bw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=473&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fact check platform (AMSI, 2022, reproduced with permission)</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, from total of 1,596 respondents from <a href="https://weblama.amsi.or.id/download/research-report-fact-check-audience-in-indonesia-2022/">our research</a>, only 379 of them use messaging apps – WhatsApp, Telegram, Line – to seek fact-check contents. </p>
<p>The majority of respondents (1,335) still prefer to access fact-check content via social media. Other platforms they prefer to use are news websites (769), search engines (731) and television (388).</p>
<p>We argue that personalised fact-checking –- through WhatsApp or other messaging apps –- is important to complement existing fact-checking strategies targeting social media.</p>
<h2>What can fact-check communities do?</h2>
<p>To begin with, journalists can integrate the fact-check contents they publish on social media or news websites with messaging services, especially WhatsApp. </p>
<p>Integration with messaging apps will increase engagement with audiences and, at the same time, expand the distribution of fact checks to combat misinformation.</p>
<p>Press institutions and fact-checkers can also use chat features to engage audiences. <a href="https://wa.me/6285921600500">MAFINDO</a> and Indonesia media organisation <a href="https://wa.me/6281315777057">Tempo</a> have done this. Both organisations collaborate with Whatsapp to integrate fact-checks using a chatbot technology.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Tempo’s chatbot for fact-checking activities.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The chatbots will work or respond only after receiving messages from the users. Through this feature, all users can choose to read fact-check articles or report suspicious information.</p>
<p>Tempo and MAFINDO’s chatbots are a good first step. </p>
<p>However, both are a passive technology, because they only receive fact-checking messages from readers and then respond accordingly by sending the same fact-check articles for all users. In addition, only users who have the numbers of the two chatbots can access this technology.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lA7yu2_RcZQ?wmode=transparent&start=14" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">MAFINDO’s chatbot for fact-checking activities.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Based on the evidence I’ve seen , I believe we need to strengthen this approach with two strategies: <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21670811.2019.1655462">push notifications</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0020025516322617">personalisation</a>.</p>
<p>Push notifications use technology to automatically deliver notifications and digital content to audiences. Personalisation is an effort to map audience preferences or characteristics that can then be used as a basis to send relevant content or notifications.</p>
<h2>Personalised push notifications</h2>
<p>News media companies and fact-check communities could start by <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.4324/9781003099260-5/selling-news-audiences-qualitative-inquiry-emerging-logics-algorithmic-news-personalization-european-quality-news-media-bal%C3%A1zs-bod%C3%B3">mapping their audience database</a>, based on gender, occupation or location, as well as people’s reading time online.</p>
<p>Fact-check consumption patterns are closely related to audience characteristics. So, media companies could create databases to map different audiences’ interests in fact-checking different topics. </p>
<p>After mapping their audience, the press company could send notifications on fact-check content using the personalisation and push notification strategies. </p>
<p>It means newsrooms would send notifications via WhatsApp to the relevant audiences. “Relevant” means that the notification contains a number of fact-checking content on topics liked by that audience.</p>
<p>However, we should note that push notification strategy could make errors at times. For instance, media organisations could distribute content that is irrelevant to that audience’s interests, and at the wrong time. These <a href="https://blogs.brighton.ac.uk/sm657/2016/05/09/the-ups-and-downs-of-push-notifications-on-apps/">unguided push notifications</a> could be very annoying to some audiences.</p>
<p>Therefore, personalisation and push notifications need to be present simultaneously. I call it “personalisation-based push notifications”. This would ensure users only receive content relevant to their interests.</p>
<h2>Consent and privacy protections</h2>
<p>But before starting any audience mapping work, media organisations should first secure consent from their users by asking them to opt in or out of having their data included.</p>
<p>Media companies must also guarantee that any personalised fact-checking databases or notifications would protect their audience’s personal data.</p>
<p>To avoid privacy breaches, news organisations and fact checkers need to invest in creating subscription systems using reliable technology.</p>
<p>This strategy would require investments in human resources and technology. If we could successfully implement it, our digital fortress against misinformation and misinformation will be strengthened. </p>
<p>It would be better if users could easily interact via chat with different newsrooms to ask for fact-checks about any issues they are interested in. </p>
<p>With this, more Indonesians could go from potentially spreading false information to their family and friends through personal chats, to helping share more factual, better quality information ahead of future elections.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207211/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Research on the fact-checking audience in 2021 supported by the Indonesian Cyber Media Association (AMSI).</span></em></p>Most fact-checking focuses on social media, yet misinformation can also spread quickly through messaging apps like Whatsapp. Personalised push notifications – sent directly to your phone – could help.F.X. Lilik Dwi Mardjianto, PhD Candidate at the News and Media Research Centre, University of Canberra. Researcher in journalism, Universitas Multimedia NusantaraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1853382022-06-29T14:34:42Z2022-06-29T14:34:42ZMedia literacy education in South Africa can help combat fake news - here’s what’s needed<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/469987/original/file-20220621-21-9ncabz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A teacher conducts a lesson under a tree in Limpopo Province. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sandile Ndlovu/Sowetan/ Gallo Images /Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Online platforms are replete with examples of false information – from WhatsApp messages punting some miraculous cure for COVID, to social media posts claiming a politician said something they didn’t. </p>
<p>It’s increasingly common in South Africa. <a href="https://theconversation.com/study-sheds-light-on-scourge-of-fake-news-in-africa-106946">More than 75% of South Africans</a> say they regularly come across political news they think is false. <a href="https://danimadrid.net/research/2021_how-do-african-audiences-engage-with-disinformation-what-do-they-know-about-fact-checking.pdf">Eight out of 10 South Africans</a> believe that disinformation (or “fake news”) is a problem or a serious problem in the country. </p>
<p>Researchers and policy makers have been working on strategies to counter disinformation for years. Some policymakers have suggested <a href="https://www.poynter.org/ifcn/anti-misinformation-actions/">new regulations</a> or <a href="https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/code-practice-disinformation">pressuring technology companies to do more</a>. These actions often raise the question of <a href="https://en.unesco.org/publications/balanceact">how to balance</a> free speech and regulation.</p>
<p>Another option is to increase the <a href="https://edmo.eu/media-literacy/the-importance-of-media-literacy-in-fighting-disinformation/">levels of media literacy among citizens</a>. Media literacy refers to the ability to read media texts critically, understanding the relationship between media and audiences, and knowing how media production processes work. In different parts of the world, research has shown that making people more media literate can help reduce the <a href="https://ssir.org/articles/entry/strengthen_media_literacy_to_win_the_fight_against_misinformation">spread of disinformation</a>.</p>
<p>We recently worked with <a href="https://africacheck.org/">Africa Check</a>, the largest fact-checking organisation in Africa, to map out the status of media literacy teaching in five South African provinces.</p>
<p>In a <a href="http://disinfoafrica.org/2022/06/01/an-assessment-of-media-literacy-and-fact-checking-training-needs-in-south-african-schools-and-universities/">new report</a>, we describe which media literacy skills are and are not taught in high schools and universities, and what is stopping schools and educators from teaching them. </p>
<p>The research is part of a larger project to develop resources for media literacy in the country.</p>
<p>We found that South Africa lacks a comprehensive national media literacy programme. Often it comes down to individual teachers and schools to make learners more media literate.</p>
<p>Some skills are taught in different subjects, such as life orientation, technology, language, or history. This means media literacy content is fragmented, diffused, and limited. Learners are taught how to use the media, how to stay safe online and how to produce media content, but much less focus falls on how to fact-check and verify the media.</p>
<p>Only one of the provinces we surveyed, the Western Cape, tried to implement a module on online safety for grades 8 to 12 in 2020 <a href="https://africacheck.org/">in partnership with Google</a>. Its adoption across schools was limited because of the COVID outbreak in the same year.</p>
<h2>The study</h2>
<p>Our report is the first in South Africa to survey educators at both schools and universities about their views on the need to teach media literacy to combat the spread of disinformation online. The findings are based on the responses to an online survey provided by 281 educators. We also organised focus groups and conducted interviews with policymakers, educators, and media professionals. </p>
<p>We asked them how effective media literacy programmes are, what is currently being taught at schools, and what challenges they see in the implementation thereof.
We also explored the digital skills levels of teachers and learners, and impediments in the way of broader digital access. </p>
<p>Our research found that educators in South Africa agreed with the statement that news literacy is important to democracy and that increasing the amount of time spent teaching media literacy would help reduce the amount of disinformation circulating in schools (and online, in general). </p>
<p>A life orientation teacher that we talked to said teaching media literacy was “essential” because </p>
<blockquote>
<p>we’re dealing with everyday real situations, and the kids can’t identify what’s real and what’s fake, because they don’t know it. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>All the stakeholders included in our study, from educators at different levels of their career to policymakers and professional media researchers, agreed on the importance of media literacy. But they had different views on what exactly should be taught. </p>
<p>For example, high school educators were more inclined to introduce learners to how to use different media devices, find reliable information sources and be aware of their online behaviour. University lecturers focused more on how to access and critically evaluate information gleaned from the media. </p>
<p>Online safety also featured high on the list of important subjects to cover among high school teachers. One reason for this might be that students often face online harassment and bullying, “catfishing” (<a href="https://theconversation.com/have-you-caught-a-catfish-online-dating-can-be-deceptive-109702">people using false online profiles</a>) scams and similar problems. </p>
<p>Teachers are the first line of defence when dealing with those issues in schools. Over 90% of teachers we surveyed said they had seen instances of learners sharing misinformation and rumours as the image below shows.</p>
<iframe title="Unsafe online behaviours in South African high schools" aria-label="Bar Chart" id="datawrapper-chart-0eHYC" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/0eHYC/2/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="100%" height="241"></iframe>
<h2>Inequities in access and bureaucratic processes</h2>
<p>We found that media literacy training in high school is impeded by several factors. Of these, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468227622000989">inequities</a> in access to digital devices and online resources is the most significant. Access to the internet is possible at most schools. But access at home is not equally widespread. Because teaching media literacy skills often involves the use of digital devices and access to the internet, these inequities are an important hurdle.</p>
<p>Other impediments include the bureaucratic processes surrounding the implementation of new curricula in South African schools, lack of time and materials, and the linguistic diversity across the country’s schools, which would require the development of media literacy materials in different languages. </p>
<p>One final impediment is the lack of training of educators on the tools and skills needed to be media literate. We found widespread agreement that not all teachers are well enough equipped with media literacy skills. Two in five high school teachers think they lack the proper training.</p>
<iframe title="Reasons for not teaching more media literacy skills in South African high schools" aria-label="Bar Chart" id="datawrapper-chart-a3PUE" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/a3PUE/1/" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border: none;" width="100%" height="364"></iframe>
<p>Most of the problems we identified appeared to occur across the five provinces surveyed in the report. </p>
<h2>A way forward</h2>
<p>We make several recommendations on how to increase the amount of media literacy taught in South African schools. </p>
<p>First, we caution against one-size-fits-all approaches. These are bound to fail because of differences in access and resources across schools. Care should also be taken to develop materials in the language most commonly used by learners. Materials should also be age-appropriate and with reference to actual lived experiences of the communities where they will be used.</p>
<p>Second, media literacy teaching materials should have a strong focus on mobile phones as vehicles for delivery, due to their <a href="https://www.icasa.org.za/uploads/files/State-of-the-ICT-Sector-Report-March-2020.pdf">prevalence </a> across the country.</p>
<p>Third, given the bureaucratic impediments to developing and rolling out media literacy curricula countrywide, departments of education in each province should be engaged in media literacy curriculum planning. </p>
<p>Finally, involving educators and fact-checking organisations, which are at the forefront of the fight against disinformation, should also be a priority.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/185338/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dani Madrid-Morales received funding for this project from the U.S Embassy in South Africa. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Herman Wasserman received funding for this project from the U.S. Embassy in South Africa.</span></em></p>South Africa has no comprehensive national media literacy programme. Often it comes down to individual teachers and schools to make learners more media literate.Dani Madrid-Morales, Lecturer in Journalism, University of SheffieldHerman Wasserman, Professor of Media Studies in the Centre for Film and Media Studies, University of Cape TownLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1760322022-03-03T19:10:56Z2022-03-03T19:10:56ZFact-checking can actually harm trust in media: new research<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445327/original/file-20220209-47970-1trdj95.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With a federal election expected in May, at a time of great upheaval at home and around the world, the need for trusted media to accurately inform voters’ choices and debunk myths will be critical.</p>
<p>Yet <a href="https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2021-06/apo-nid312650_0.pdf">studies</a> show about two-thirds of Australians are worried about misinformation, especially about COVID-19, and do not know who or what to trust.</p>
<p>This is further complicated when politicians are the culprits, making <a href="https://www.news.com.au/technology/united-australia-party-mp-craig-kelly-sends-out-unsolicited-texts-about-covid19-vaccine-reactions/news-story/a15bc05f818a150d33105d7ad2166590">false claims</a> in the news media and online. </p>
<p>So what role should journalists play in calling out these falsehoods? Or should this role be left to third parties, such as independent fact-checkers, to test verifiable claims? </p>
<h2>The fight against ‘fake news’</h2>
<p>Fact-checking is one global response to countering fake news, which has become a multi-billion-dollar industry. More than 340 fact-checking outlets now operate <a href="https://reporterslab.org/fact-checking-census-shows-slower-growth/">worldwide</a>. </p>
<p>In Australia, independent fact-checkers include newswires AAP and AFP, and RMIT ABC Fact Check (a collaboration between RMIT University and the public broadcaster). Yet little is known about what effect independent fact-checking has on public trust in news where false claims can be found.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2022.2031240">a new study</a> published in a major international journal, we investigate if third-party fact-checking affects public trust in news. To do this we used the case study of the “<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-sports-rorts-affair-shows-the-government-misunderstands-the-role-of-the-public-service-130796">sports rorts</a>” scandal. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-sports-rorts-affair-shows-the-need-for-a-proper-federal-icac-with-teeth-122800">The 'sports rorts' affair shows the need for a proper federal ICAC – with teeth</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>As a quick refresher, the sports rorts scandal unfolded just before the 2019 federal election. Sporting clubs in Coalition and marginal seats disproportionately benefited from a taxpayer-funded community sports grants program. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.anao.gov.au/work/performance-audit/award-funding-under-the-community-sport-infrastructure-program">Australian National Audit Office</a> later investigated the funding process. It found the then sports minister and National Party deputy, Bridget McKenzie, had not allocated funds based on independent advice given to her. Several senior ministers, including Peter Dutton, defended McKenzie’s actions before she was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/feb/02/bridget-mckenzie-resigns-following-sports-rort-affair">forced to resign</a> from that role because of the alleged pork-barrelling.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445307/original/file-20220209-16-1kjpidi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/445307/original/file-20220209-16-1kjpidi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445307/original/file-20220209-16-1kjpidi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445307/original/file-20220209-16-1kjpidi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445307/original/file-20220209-16-1kjpidi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445307/original/file-20220209-16-1kjpidi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/445307/original/file-20220209-16-1kjpidi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The research focused on fact-checking around the ‘sport rorts’ affair, which ultimately led to the resignation of Senator Bridget McKenzie.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Marc Tewksbury/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We use this real-life example in an experimental design to see what impact a real <a href="https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/duttons-mckenzie-defence-fails-audit-test/">AAP fact-check</a> about the scandal had on Australians’ trust in news. We mocked up two news stories – one presented as being from ABC online and another from Newscorp’s news.com.au. The stories contained identical wording and headlines, but used different fonts and banners. </p>
<p>Both stories contained a real quote from the then home affairs minister, Peter Dutton, about McKenzie’s decision-making process. On January 23 2020, Dutton stated:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bridget McKenzie made recommendations, as I understand it, on advice from the sporting body that these programs that have been funded were recommended.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Dutton restated this position in <a href="https://twitter.com/TheTodayShow/status/1220453323087798300">other media</a> that week, including on Nine’s Today program, suggesting his words were not a slip of the tongue.
The AAP fact-checked the statement and labelled it “false”.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1220453323087798300"}"></div></p>
<p>Months after the scandal subsided, public recall of specific details was likely overtaken by pandemic news stories. So, we invited 1,600 adult Australians to do an online survey and randomly assigned them to read either our constructed ABC or News Corp story, and then answer questions about the trustworthiness of that story (and the media outlet more generally). We randomly assigned half the respondents to also read the <a href="https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/duttons-mckenzie-defence-fails-audit-test/">AAP fact-check</a>. </p>
<p>The findings tell both a positive and negative story about how Australians view political news. On the up side, trust in the news story (without seeing the fact check) was high for both our ABC (86%) and news.com.au stories (79%). Political partisanship has some impact, with Labor supporters the most trusting of the news story overall (87%). </p>
<p>Consistent with other <a href="https://www.ipsos.com/en-au/australians-trust-media-less-ipsos-trust-media-study">Australian surveys</a>, we found the ABC had higher levels of public trust overall than News Corp. However, some strong Coalition and right-wing supporters had greater trust in the news.com.au story, as other research has also <a href="https://www.ussc.edu.au/analysis/americas-trust-deficit">found</a>.</p>
<p>Concerningly, we found that when participants read the AAP fact check after reading the news story, trust in the original story fell sharply (by 13% overall), even after respondents’ political or news source preferences were taken into account. Counter-intuitively, the act of fact-checking had a clear negative influence on readers’ trust in the original news story for both the abc.com.au and new.com.au stories as the chart below shows. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444945/original/file-20220208-13-vlqbpl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444945/original/file-20220208-13-vlqbpl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444945/original/file-20220208-13-vlqbpl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=468&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444945/original/file-20220208-13-vlqbpl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=468&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444945/original/file-20220208-13-vlqbpl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=468&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444945/original/file-20220208-13-vlqbpl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=588&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444945/original/file-20220208-13-vlqbpl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=588&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444945/original/file-20220208-13-vlqbpl.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=588&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Measurements of trust in the news story when fact checked and not fact checked, the news source and political party.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Authors</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This suggests news audiences may not separate a politician’s false claims within a news story from the news reporting itself. Think about that for a second: </p>
<ul>
<li>the politician told a falsehood</li>
<li>a fact-checker corrects it</li>
<li>but, as a consequence, the news story itself suffers the loss of public trust.<br></li>
</ul>
<p>This finding is particularly important given Australian journalists’ reliance on a “he said/she said” news reporting style (this excludes opinion pieces), in which readers are presented with competing statements, one or both of which may be false, rather than the reporter actively adjudicating the false claim. </p>
<p>In this case, letting fact-checkers determine the truth may be a deeply unwise strategy for journalism. While fact-checkers unquestionably do many positive things such as identify misinformation, in this instance it lowered trust in political journalism.</p>
<p>With the public demanding the truth, it seems journalists have a very important role to play by critiquing politicians’ false claims in news stories at the time of reporting. </p>
<p>While some outlets like Crikey already practise active adjudication in political stories, we acknowledge it might be problematic for an organisation like the ABC, which has impartiality as a duty in the ABC Act 1983. </p>
<p>However, the ABC’s 2019 revised code of practice specifies that “impartiality” does not mean every perspective receives equal attention. Other media have the same policy. For example, The Conversation’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-change-deniers-are-dangerous-they-dont-deserve-a-place-on-our-site-123164">approach to reporting climate change</a> has decided in favour of the scientific evidence and does not give air time to climate denialism. </p>
<p>We see lessons in our findings for independent fact-checkers as well. Fact-checkers might help increase trust in news by more clearly stating they are fact-checking a politician’s specific claim, rather than the media coverage that contains it. Some fact-checkers make this distinction already on their websites, but rarely on every fact-check explanation. </p>
<p>Spelling this out may help audiences avoid conflating a fact-check of a specific political falsehood with the trustworthiness of the news story and media outlet. </p>
<p>With a federal election just months away, this study is a timely reminder of the important role that political journalists can play as sense-makers rather than just conveyers of political information.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176032/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrea Carson receives funding from the Australian Research Council and Facebook. This project was funded with research grants from La Trobe University (academic start-up award).</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Aaron Martin receives funding from the Australian Research Council and this project was funded by University of Melbourne Policy Lab. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Justin Phillips' individual and collaborative research receives funding from the Facebook, the Royal Society Te Apārangi, and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Gibbons does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Our study found high levels of trust in media reports – but that trust can be eroded by fact-checking. Journalists need to rethink the way they report political stories.Andrea Carson, Professor of Political Communication, Department of Politics, Media and Philosophy, La Trobe UniversityAaron Martin, Associate Professor, School of Social and Political Sciences, The University of MelbourneAndrew Gibbons, Postdoctoral Fellow, Edward A. Clark Center for Australian and New Zealand Studies, The University of Texas at AustinJustin Phillips, Senior lecturer, University of WaikatoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1779212022-02-26T05:02:36Z2022-02-26T05:02:36ZFake viral footage is spreading alongside the real horror in Ukraine. Here are 5 ways to spot it<p>Amid the alarming images of <a href="https://theconversation.com/russia-invades-ukraine-5-essential-reads-from-experts-177815">Russia’s invasion of Ukraine</a> over the past few days, millions of people have also seen <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/24/social-media-platforms-russia-ukraine-disinformation-00011559">misleading, manipulated or false information</a> about the conflict on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, TikTok and Telegram.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448664/original/file-20220226-31488-1blhz2o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Screenshot of fake news TikTok video" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448664/original/file-20220226-31488-1blhz2o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/448664/original/file-20220226-31488-1blhz2o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=891&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448664/original/file-20220226-31488-1blhz2o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=891&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448664/original/file-20220226-31488-1blhz2o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=891&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448664/original/file-20220226-31488-1blhz2o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1119&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448664/original/file-20220226-31488-1blhz2o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1119&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/448664/original/file-20220226-31488-1blhz2o.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1119&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Old footage, rebadged on TikTok as the latest from Ukraine.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">TikTok</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One example is this <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@notimundo/video/7068170668507974918?_t=8Q8LwdZRa8s&_r=1">video of military jets posted to TikTok</a>, which is historical footage but captioned as live video of the situation in Ukraine.</p>
<p>Visuals, because of their persuasive <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12525-019-00345-y">potential</a> and attention-grabbing nature, are an especially potent choice for those seeking to mislead. Where creating, editing or sharing inauthentic visual content isn’t satire or art, it is usually <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/21670811.2017.1345645?casa_token=t8LANzDiQGUAAAAA:3vZ76fwtwpHt82jeB3mFJXPOpfsks4aRZHhDiCpcNVgJtDFIFcqskhUL796_P609UZm2KVwxeHy8xM4">politically or economically motivated</a>. </p>
<p>Disinformation campaigns aim to distract, confuse, manipulate and sow division, discord, and uncertainty in the community. This is a common strategy for <a href="http://repository.ou.ac.lk/bitstream/handle/94ousl/928/journalism_fake_news_disinformation_print_friendly_0%20(1).pdf?sequence=1">highly polarised nations</a> where socioeconomic inequalities, disenfranchisement and propaganda are prevalent. </p>
<p>How is this fake content created and spread, what’s being done to debunk it, and how can you ensure you don’t fall for it yourself?</p>
<h2>What are the most common fakery techniques?</h2>
<p>Using an existing photo or video and claiming it came from a different time or place is one of the most common forms of misinformation in this context. This requires no special software or technical skills – just a willingness to upload an old video of a missile attack or other arresting image, and describe it as new footage.</p>
<p>Another low-tech option is to <a href="https://www.grid.news/story/misinformation/2022/02/23/autopsied-bodies-and-false-flags-how-pro-russian-disinformation-spreads-chaos-in-ukraine/">stage or pose</a> actions or events and present them as reality. This was the case with destroyed vehicles that Russia claimed were bombed by Ukraine.</p>
<p>Using a particular lens or vantage point can also change how the scene looks and can be used to deceive. A tight shot of people, for example, can make it hard to gauge how many were in a crowd, compared with an aerial shot.</p>
<p>Taking things further still, Photoshop or equivalent software can be used to add or remove people or objects from a scene, or to crop elements out from a photograph. An example of object addition is the below photograph, which purports to show construction machinery outside a kindergarten in eastern Ukraine. The satirical text accompanying the image jokes about the “calibre of the construction machinery” - the author suggesting that reports of damage to buildings from military ordinance are exaggerated or untrue. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1494617413245091853"}"></div></p>
<p>Close inspection reveals this image was <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-ukraine-alteredmachinery-idUSL1N2UT2W0">digitally altered</a> to include the machinery. This tweet could be seen as an attempt to downplay the extent of damage resulting from a Russian-backed missile attack, and in a wider context to create confusion and doubt as to veracity of other images emerging from the conflict zone. </p>
<h2>What’s being done about it?</h2>
<p>European organisations such as <a href="https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/02/23/documenting-and-debunking-dubious-footage-from-ukraines-frontlines/">Bellingcat</a> have begun compiling lists of dubious social media claims about the Russia-Ukraine conflict and debunking them where necessary. </p>
<p>Journalists and fact-checkers are also working to verify content and <a href="https://twitter.com/AricToler/status/1494738571483353092?s=20&t=bndDHkpko9nibN9LjRmaWw">raise awareness</a> of known fakes. Large, well-resourced news outlets such as the BBC are also <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/60513452">calling out misinformation</a>.</p>
<p>Social media platforms have added new <a href="https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/state-affiliated">labels</a> to identify state-run media organisations or provide more <a href="https://9to5mac.com/2018/04/03/facebook-newsfeed-update/">background information</a> about sources or people in your networks who have also shared a particular story. </p>
<p>They have also <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/24/social-media-platforms-russia-ukraine-disinformation-00011559">tweaked their algorithms</a> to change what content is amplified and have hired staff to spot and flag misleading content. Platforms are also doing some work behind the scenes to detect and <a href="https://transparency.twitter.com/en/reports/information-operations.html">publicly share</a> information on state-linked information operations.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-can-the-west-do-to-help-ukraine-it-can-start-by-countering-putins-information-strategy-177912">What can the West do to help Ukraine? It can start by countering Putin's information strategy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What can I do about it?</h2>
<p>You can attempt to <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17512786.2020.1832139">fact-check images</a> for yourself rather than taking them at face value. An <a href="https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck-resources/how-do-you-fact-check-an-image/">article</a> we wrote late last year for the Australian Associated Press explains the fact-checking process at each stage: image creation, editing and distribution.</p>
<p>Here are five simple steps you can take:</p>
<p><strong>1. Examine the metadata</strong></p>
<p>This <a href="https://t.me/nm_dnr/6192">Telegram post</a> claims Polish-speaking saboteurs attacked a sewage facility in an attempt to place a tank of chlorine for a “<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-are-false-flag-attacks-and-did-russia-stage-any-to-claim-justification-for-invading-ukraine-177879">false flag</a>” attack.</p>
<p>But the video’s metadata – the details about how and when the video was created – <a href="https://twitter.com/EliotHiggins/status/1495356701717020681?s=20&t=DSIyWgyKfPu2vKvVQLjnOw">show</a> it was filmed days before the alleged date of the incident. </p>
<p>To check metadata for yourself, you can download the file and use software such as Adobe Photoshop or Bridge to examine it. Online <a href="http://metapicz.com/#landing">metadata viewers</a> also exist that allow you to check by using the image’s web link.</p>
<p>One hurdle to this approach is that social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter often strip the metadata from photos and videos when they are uploaded to their sites. In these cases, you can try requesting the original file or consulting fact-checking websites to see whether they have already verified or debunked the footage in question.</p>
<p><strong>2. Consult a fact-checking resource</strong></p>
<p>Organisations such as the <a href="https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/">Australian Associated Press</a>, <a href="https://www.rmit.edu.au/about/schools-colleges/media-and-communication/industry/factlab/debunking-misinformation">RMIT/ABC</a>, <a href="https://factcheck.afp.com/">Agence France-Presse (AFP)</a> and <a href="https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2022/02/23/documenting-and-debunking-dubious-footage-from-ukraines-frontlines/">Bellingcat</a> maintain lists of fact-checks their teams have performed. </p>
<p>The AFP has already <a href="https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.323W3V8">debunked</a> a video claiming to show an explosion from the current conflict in Ukraine as being from the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-ammonium-nitrate-the-chemical-that-exploded-in-beirut-143979">2020 port disaster</a> in Beirut.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1496858320182804493"}"></div></p>
<p><strong>3. Search more broadly</strong></p>
<p>If old content has been recycled and repurposed, you may be able to find the same footage used elsewhere. You can use <a href="https://www.google.com/imghp?hl=EN">Google Images</a> or <a href="https://tineye.com/">TinEye</a> to “reverse image search” a picture and see where else it appears online.</p>
<p>But be aware that simple edits such as reversing the left-right orientation of an image can fool search engines and make them think the flipped image is new.</p>
<p><strong>4. Look for inconsistencies</strong></p>
<p>Does the purported time of day match the direction of light you would expect at that time, for example? Do <a href="https://twitter.com/Forrest_Rogers/status/1496254107660738568?s=20&t=KSr6GYxwMhqW719GhZPvlA">watches</a> or clocks visible in the image correspond to the alleged timeline claimed?</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1496254107660738568"}"></div></p>
<p>You can also compare other data points, such as politicians’ schedules or verified sightings, <a href="https://earth.google.com/static/9.157.0.0/app_min.html">Google Earth</a> vision or <a href="https://www.google.com/maps">Google Maps</a> imagery, to try and triangulate claims and see whether the details are consistent.</p>
<p><strong>5. Ask yourself some simple questions</strong></p>
<p>Do you know <em>where</em>, <em>when</em> and <em>why</em> the photo or video was made? Do you know <em>who</em> made it, and whether what you’re looking at is the <em>original</em> version?</p>
<p>Using online tools such as <a href="https://www.invid-project.eu/">InVID</a> or <a href="https://29a.ch/photo-forensics/#forensic-magnifier">Forensically</a> can potentially help answer some of these questions. Or you might like to refer to this list of <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kRfo1ToexG8dEiMqurXKqzEeXdyHn7Ic/view">20 questions</a> you can use to “interrogate” social media footage with the right level of healthy scepticism.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/3-2-billion-images-and-720-000-hours-of-video-are-shared-online-daily-can-you-sort-real-from-fake-148630">3.2 billion images and 720,000 hours of video are shared online daily. Can you sort real from fake?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Ultimately, if you’re in doubt, don’t share or repeat claims that haven’t been published by a reputable source such as an international news organisation. And consider using some of these <a href="https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck-resources/how-do-you-know-what-information-sources-to-trust/">principles</a> when deciding which sources to trust.</p>
<p>By doing this, you can help limit the influence of misinformation, and help clarify the true situation in Ukraine.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/177921/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>T.J. Thomson has received funding from the AAP, the Australian Academy of the Humanities, and from the Australian Research Council through Discovery Project DP210100859. He is also a past contributor to the Australian Associated Press.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel Angus receives funding from Australian Research Council through Discovery Projects DP200100519 ‘Using machine vision to explore Instagram’s everyday promotional cultures’, DP200101317 ‘Evaluating the Challenge of ‘Fake News’ and Other Malinformation’, and Linkage Project LP190101051 'Young Australians and the Promotion of Alcohol on Social Media'.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paula Dootson has received funding from the Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC, Queensland Government, and Natural Hazards Research Australia. </span></em></p>Footage claiming to document the situation in Ukraine may not necessarily be genuine. Here’s how to treat viral footage with the right level of scepticism before sharing it on social media.T.J. Thomson, Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Media, Queensland University of TechnologyDaniel Angus, Professor of Digital Communication, Queensland University of TechnologyPaula Dootson, Senior Lecturer, Queensland University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1688342021-11-04T19:10:35Z2021-11-04T19:10:35ZStudents are told not to use Wikipedia for research. But it’s a trustworthy source<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429888/original/file-20211103-25-n3j4f1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/istanbul-turkey-march-27-2018-screenshot-1055520989">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>At the start of each university year, we ask first-year students a question: how many have been told by their secondary teachers not to use Wikipedia? Without fail, nearly every hand shoots up. Wikipedia offers free and reliable information instantly. So why do teachers almost universally distrust it? </p>
<p>Wikipedia has community-enforced policies on neutrality, reliability and notability. This means <a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Instructor_Basics_How_to_Use_Wikipedia_as_a_Teaching_Tool.pdf">all information</a> “must be presented accurately and without bias”; sources must come from a third party; and a Wikipedia article is notable and should be created if there has been “third-party coverage of the topic in reliable sources”.</p>
<p>Wikipedia is free, non-profit, and <a href="https://wikimediafoundation.org/wikipedia20/">has been operating for over two decades</a>, making it an internet success story. At a time when it’s increasingly difficult to separate truth from falsehood, Wikipedia is an accessible tool for fact-checking and fighting misinformation. </p>
<h2>Why is Wikipedia so reliable?</h2>
<p>Many teachers point out that anyone can edit a Wikipedia page, not just experts on the subject. But this doesn’t make Wikipedia’s information unreliable. It’s virtually impossible, for instance, for conspiracies to remain published on Wikipedia.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/on-the-job-with-a-wikipedian-in-residence-118494">On the job with a ‘Wikipedian in residence’</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>For popular articles, Wikipedia’s <a href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Instructor_Basics_How_to_Use_Wikipedia_as_a_Teaching_Tool.pdf">online community of volunteers, administrators and bots</a> ensure edits are based on reliable citations. Popular articles are reviewed thousands of times. Some media experts, such as Amy Bruckman, a professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology’s computing centre, argue that because of this painstaking process, a highly-edited article on Wikipedia <a href="https://au.pcmag.com/social-media/87504/wikipedia-the-most-reliable-source-on-the-internet">might be the most reliable source of information ever created</a>. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1454764093576040451"}"></div></p>
<p>Traditional academic articles – the most common source of scientific evidence – <a href="https://theconversation.com/shifting-toward-open-peer-review-156043">are typically only peer-reviewed by up to three people</a> and then never edited again. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-peer-review-27797">Explainer: what is peer review?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Less frequently edited articles on Wikipedia might be less reliable than popular ones. But it’s easy to find out how an article has been created and modified on Wikipedia. All modifications to an article are archived in its “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bird&action=history">history</a>” page. Disputes between editors about the article’s content are documented in its “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bird">talk</a>” page. </p>
<p>To use Wikipedia effectively, school students need to be taught to find and analyse these pages of an article, so they can quickly assess the article’s reliability.</p>
<h2>Is information on Wikipedia too shallow?</h2>
<p>Many teachers also argue the information on Wikipedia is too basic, particularly for tertiary students. This argument supposes all fact-checking must involve deep engagement. But this is <a href="https://hapgood.us/2017/03/04/how-news-literacy-gets-the-web-wrong/">not best practice</a> for conducting initial investigation into a subject online. Deep research needs to come later, once the validity of the source has been established.</p>
<p>Still, some teachers are horrified by the idea students need to be taught to assess information quickly and superficially. If you look up the general capabilities in the Australian Curriculum, you will find “<a href="https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/general-capabilities/critical-and-creative-thinking/">critical and creative thinking</a>” encourages deep, broad reflection. Educators who conflate “critical” and “media” literacy may be inclined to believe analysis of online material must be slow and thorough.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430128/original/file-20211104-13-1ajc79d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Primary school student writing on notepad with laptop open." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430128/original/file-20211104-13-1ajc79d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430128/original/file-20211104-13-1ajc79d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430128/original/file-20211104-13-1ajc79d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430128/original/file-20211104-13-1ajc79d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430128/original/file-20211104-13-1ajc79d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430128/original/file-20211104-13-1ajc79d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430128/original/file-20211104-13-1ajc79d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Students should be taught to use Wikipedia’s ‘talk’ and ‘history’ pages.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/kid-self-isolation-using-computor-his-1707140332">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Yet the reality is we live in an “<a href="https://firstmonday.org/article/view/519/440">attention economy</a>” where everyone and everything on the internet is <a href="https://www.edsurge.com/news/2018-12-19-recalibrating-our-approach-to-misinformation">vying for our attention</a>. Our time is precious, so engaging deeply with spurious online content, and potentially falling down misinformation rabbit holes, wastes a most valuable commodity – our attention. </p>
<h2>Wikipedia can be a tool for better media literacy</h2>
<p>Research suggests Australian children are not getting sufficient instruction in spotting fake news. <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-live-in-an-age-of-fake-news-but-australian-children-are-not-learning-enough-about-media-literacy-141371">Only one in five young Australians</a> in 2020 reported having a lesson during the past year that helped them decide whether news stories could be trusted.</p>
<p>Our students clearly <a href="https://www.utas.edu.au/social-change/publications/insights/insight-five-media-literacy-in-australian-schools">need more media literacy education</a>, and Wikipedia can be a good media literacy instrument. One way is to use it is with “<a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3048994">lateral reading</a>”. This means when faced with an unfamiliar online claim, students should leave the web page they’re on and open a new browser tab. They can then investigate what trusted sources say about the claim. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-live-in-an-age-of-fake-news-but-australian-children-are-not-learning-enough-about-media-literacy-141371">We live in an age of 'fake news'. But Australian children are not learning enough about media literacy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Wikipedia is the perfect classroom resource for this purpose, even for primary-aged students. When first encountering unfamiliar information, students can be encouraged to go to the relevant Wikipedia page to check reliability. If the unknown information isn’t verifiable, they can discard it and move on. </p>
<p>More experienced fact-checkers can also <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/opinion-fake-news-web-literacy-propaganda-fact-checkers_n_5c1812f5e4b0432554c332e3">beeline to the authoritative references</a> at the bottom of each Wikipedia article. </p>
<p>In the future, we hope first-year university students enter our classrooms already understanding the value of Wikipedia. This will mean a widespread cultural shift has taken place in Australian primary and secondary schools. In a time of climate change and pandemics, everyone needs to be able to separate fact from fiction. Wikipedia can be part of the remedy.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168834/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rachel Cunneen has received grants from the ACT Education Directorate; The University of Canberra and the US Embassy (Aust). </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mathieu O'Neil has received grants from the ACT Education Directorate; The University of Canberra and the US Embassy (Aust). He is affiliated with the Digital Commons Policy Council. </span></em></p>At a time when it’s increasingly difficult to separate truth from falsehood, Wikipedia is an accessible tool for fact-checking and fighting misinformation.Rachel Cunneen, Senior Lecturer in English and Literacy Education, Student Success and LANTITE coordinator, University of CanberraMathieu O'Neil, Associate Professor of Communication, News and Media Research Centre, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1437772020-10-22T17:03:44Z2020-10-22T17:03:44ZComics can teach readers how to identify fake news<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/364642/original/file-20201021-19-xgpfda.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=9%2C0%2C6247%2C3592&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Graphic narratives can be a great tool to teach media literacy.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>At this point, most of us know the drill when it comes to COVID-19: proper hand hygiene, mask wearing and social distancing.</p>
<p>But does setting fire to cell towers make your list? Probably not. A conspiracy theory linking 5G mobile technology to the COVID-19 outbreak has ignited fears worldwide, prompting just <a href="https://globalnews.ca/video/6947087/conspiracy-theorists-burn-5g-towers-claiming-link-to-covid-19">this response</a> from a few individuals in Québec, who set ablaze <a href="https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/two-arrested-after-two-more-quebec-cell-towers-go-up-in-flames-1.4928666">seven mobile towers</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cell-tower-vandals-and-re-open-protestors-why-some-people-believe-in-coronavirus-conspiracies-138192">Cell tower vandals and re-open protestors — why some people believe in coronavirus conspiracies</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Although such destructive responses are rare, thousands of digital consumers have absorbed aspects of this falsehood, pushing fringe beliefs into the mainstream despite refutations from the World Health Organization and <a href="https://www.cwta.ca/blog/2019/08/08/setting-the-record-straight-on-5g-wireless-rf-safety/">multiple agencies in Canada and the United States</a>. What started as a conspiracy turned into a real crisis for <a href="https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/half-of-canadians-say-governments-are-hiding-something-about-covid-19-poll">the people who immediately believed what they’d heard</a>.</p>
<p>My research focuses on critical media studies and ideological representations in news and popular culture. I regularly offer workshops to schools and community groups that engage the public in contemporary media literacy issues. My book, <a href="https://btlbooks.com/book/wont-get-fooled-again"><em>Won’t Get Fooled Again: A Graphic Guide To Fake News</em></a>, helps readers identify the underlying purpose of the messages they receive and learn how to do basic research before accepting the validity of what’s being presented to them.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="InstagramEmbed" data-react-props="{"url":"https://www.instagram.com/p/CAX4jKygkeA","accessToken":"127105130696839|b4b75090c9688d81dfd245afe6052f20"}"></div></p>
<h2>Dealing with fake news</h2>
<p>Fake news is an <a href="https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/fake-news-creates-serious-issues-for-battling-pandemic-chief-public-health-doc-says">increasingly pressing problem</a>. In fact, a <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fake-news-facebook-twitter-poll-1.5169916">2019 poll</a> found 90 per cent of Canadians reported falling for false information online.</p>
<p>As consumers, we need to learn how to filter content and become our own educators, editors and fact-checkers to ensure the information we act upon is trustworthy. In a <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/radio/spark/when-it-comes-to-covid-19-social-media-fills-a-gap-left-by-scientists-and-it-s-a-problem-says-sociologist-1.5608911">constantly changing informational</a> and political environment, it’s no wonder we often struggle to separate fact from fiction.</p>
<p>Research indicates people create misinformation for two primary reasons: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1556314">money</a> and <a href="https://www.nber.org/papers/w23089">ideology</a>.</p>
<p>Articles, videos and other forms of content can generate large amounts of money for the websites that host these pieces. Most of their income comes from clicks on advertisements, so the more people who visit their sites, the better chances they have of boosting ad revenue. This feedback loop has led many publishers to lean on false information to drive traffic.</p>
<p>The threshold for making believable fake news has fallen as well. A conspiracy theorist, for example, can create a web page using a professional template with high-quality photos in just a few clicks. Once the content has been added, sharing it on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other platforms requires even less effort.</p>
<p>These misinformation and fake-news campaigns <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/facebook-news-group-bot-posting-1.5029780">amplify and circulate through false digital accounts</a> using <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/5879364/social-media-bots-alberta-federal-election/">automated programs known as bots</a> that use certain keywords to influence and impact conversations among like-minded clusters of people. The results can foment discord on hot-button Canadian policy issues — like <a href="https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/09/05/news/international-media-spread-two-fake-stories-about-canadian-immigration-its-weird">immigration</a> and <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/2349786/no-canada-doesnt-spend-more-on-refugees-than-pensioners/">refugees</a> — possibly disrupting <a href="https://www.cigionline.org/articles/fake-news-threatens-canadas-federal-election">election outcomes</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/364643/original/file-20201021-23-7dto98.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A page with six comic book panels showing an exchange about news." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/364643/original/file-20201021-23-7dto98.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/364643/original/file-20201021-23-7dto98.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=881&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364643/original/file-20201021-23-7dto98.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=881&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364643/original/file-20201021-23-7dto98.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=881&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364643/original/file-20201021-23-7dto98.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1108&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364643/original/file-20201021-23-7dto98.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1108&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364643/original/file-20201021-23-7dto98.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1108&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Focus groups with students informed the content for ‘Won’t Get Fooled Again,’ a graphic narrative teaching media literacy.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Alan Spinney)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Generating anxiety and undermining truth</h2>
<p>Canadians are expressing anxiety about the social impact of fake news, with 70 per cent fearing it could <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/elections-canada-social-media-monitoring-findings-1.5444268">affect the outcome of a federal election</a>. The Pew Research Center warns that fake news may even <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/02/21/concerns-about-democracy-in-the-digital-age/">influence the core functions of the democratic system</a> and contribute to “truth decay.”</p>
<p>Dubious and inflammatory content can undermine the quality of public debate, promote misconceptions, foster greater hostility toward political opponents and <a href="https://democracy.arts.ubc.ca/2018/01/18/fake-news/">corrode trust in government and journalism</a>.</p>
<p>The effects of misinformation have been evident throughout the COVID-19 epidemic, with <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-coronavirus-mask-efficacy/partly-false-claim-wear-a-face-mask-covid-19-risk-reduced-by-up-to-98-5-idUSKCN2252T6">many citizens confused as to whether a mask will decrease the chances of spreading the infection</a>. Similar tactics are being levelled against <a href="https://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a32729926/george-floyd-protest-fake-rumors-debunked/">Black Lives Matter protesters</a>, such as <a href="https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/02/facebook-posts/black-lives-matter-activists-are-not-planning-riot/">labelling them all as rioters</a> when videos and photos show most behaving peacefully.</p>
<p>Conspiracy theories about the “Chinese virus,” amplified by politicians in <a href="https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2020/04/23/does-she-work-for-canada-or-for-china-conservative-mps-attack-on-dr-theresa-tam-draws-no-comment-from-andrew-scheer.html">Canada</a> and the <a href="https://thehill.com/changing-america/respect/diversity-inclusion/489464-trumps-use-of-the-term-chinese-virus-for">U.S.</a>, have <a href="https://www.rappler.com/world/us-canada/coronavirus-fueling-anti-asian-hate-crimes-canada">fanned the flames of anti-Asian sentiments following the spread of COVID-19</a>. Data from law enforcement and Chinese-Canadian groups has shown an increase in anti-Asian hate incidents in Canada <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/7033253/coronavirus-asian-racism-crisis-canada/">since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/anti-asian-racism-during-coronavirus-how-the-language-of-disease-produces-hate-and-violence-134496">Anti-Asian racism during coronavirus: How the language of disease produces hate and violence</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Who and how to trust</h2>
<p>Aside from a few social media platforms that identify misleading content and provide a brief explanation, most information online or in print can appear factual. So how can we figure out which sources to trust?</p>
<p>As a sociologist who focuses on critical media studies, I formed focus groups and collected input from my students to create a resources to guide readers through identifying fake news. While regulation and legislation are part of the solution, experts agree we must take swift action to teach students <a href="https://www.scetv.org/stories/education/2020/why-verification-might-be-most-important-word-you-teach-your-students-2020">how to seek verification before acting on fake news</a>. </p>
<p>In my findings, students identified several reasons why media outlets post or re-publish fake news, including making mistakes, being short-staffed, not fact-checking and actively seeking greater viewership by posting fake news.</p>
<p>The students pointed to holistic media literacy and critical thinking training as the best responses. This finding runs counter to <a href="https://www.niemanlab.org/2017/09/adding-a-disputed-label-to-fake-news-seems-to-work-a-little-but-for-some-groups-it-actually-backfires/">the tactics currently used</a> by publishers and tech companies to label or “fact-check” disputed news.</p>
<p>One student summarized this mindset best: “As citizens and consumers, we have a responsibility to be critical. Don’t accept stories blindly. Hold those in power responsible for their actions!”</p>
<p>Getting multiple perspectives is a great way to expand our digest of viewpoints. Once we can see a story from more than one angle, separating truth from falsehood becomes much simpler.</p>
<p>At this point, I transitioned from recording perceptions of fake news to determining how to identify it. Providing students with information about the nature and agendas of fake news, in an immersive format, seemed to be a key step in engaging and cultivating their critical literacy capabilities. Information delivery was a key consideration.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/364644/original/file-20201021-21-knelgg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A page with six comic book panels showing an exchange about news." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/364644/original/file-20201021-21-knelgg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/364644/original/file-20201021-21-knelgg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=881&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364644/original/file-20201021-21-knelgg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=881&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364644/original/file-20201021-21-knelgg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=881&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364644/original/file-20201021-21-knelgg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1107&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364644/original/file-20201021-21-knelgg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1107&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/364644/original/file-20201021-21-knelgg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1107&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Graphic narratives can help communicate complex and multiple ideas at the same time, such as research skills and mcivic rights.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Alan Spinney)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Illustrating the narratives</h2>
<p>Researchers have shown <a href="http://www.scottmccloud.com/2-print/1-uc/index.html">graphic narratives can accelerate cognition by focusing the reader’s attention on crucial information</a>. Images <a href="https://www.upress.state.ms.us/Books/T/The-System-of-Comics">clarify complex content</a>, especially for <a href="https://www.literacyworldwide.org/blog/literacy-now/2015/08/12/comic-books-as-models-for-literacy-instruction">visual learners</a>. Comic books require readers to create meaning using <a href="https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/graphic-encounters-9781441126412/">multiple factors that helps develop a complex, multi-modal literacy</a>.</p>
<p>A major goal of my book involves unpacking the motivations behind the news we consume. Consider why a particular person was interviewed: Who do they represent? What do they want us to believe? Is another point of view missing?</p>
<p><a href="https://btlbooks.com/book/wont-get-fooled-again"><em>Won’t Get Fooled Again: A Graphic Guide to Fake News</em></a> is the culmination of my research and the insights drawn from media literacy scholarship. This guide helps readers understand what fake news is, where it comes from, and how to check its accuracy.</p>
<p>If there’s one habit my students and I hope everyone will develop, it’s this: pause before sharing news on social media. Double-check anything that immediately sparks anger or frustration and, remember, fake news creators want a reaction, not thoughtful reflection.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/143777/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Erin Steuter receives funding from Mount Allison University President’s Research and Creative Activity Fund.</span></em></p>Delivering media literacy in a comics format can help readers develop the skills to identify fake news and counter its effects.Erin Steuter, Professor of Sociology, Mount Allison UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1472552020-10-05T14:31:22Z2020-10-05T14:31:22ZWhy Donald Trump’s words work, and what to do about it<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/361492/original/file-20201004-18-qh6ao5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C40%2C5019%2C3338&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">With the American flag reflected in the teleprompter, President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally at Duluth International Airport on Sept. 30, 2020, in Duluth, Minn. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>As America chaotically careens toward election day with President Donald Trump fighting a COVID-19 infection, we should stop and ask: Just why and how do Trump’s words work? And how does the recent confusion sown by his doctors at Walter Reed Medical Center amplify that work?</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1312525833505058816"}"></div></p>
<p>Perhaps more importantly: What can we do about it?</p>
<p>These questions strike at the core of a deep and persistent misunderstanding about communication. Too often people assume that communication is a matter of transmitting information from one place to another and that words simply carry meaning. </p>
<p>From this perspective, the president’s words function as a conduit from his head to everyone listening. With this president, we have all become accustomed to the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-46175024">concept of “misinformation</a>,” whereby we recognize that intentionally false or misleading information is transmitted to the listener, and how it’s had <a href="https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2020/10/what-drove-the-covid-misinformation-infodemic/">a devastating impact during the COVID-19 pandemic.</a></p>
<p>We’ve also been awed by <a href="https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/26/donald-trump-twitter-addiction-216530">his use of Twitter</a> to communicate that misinformation.</p>
<h2>Trump rhetoric</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://open.lib.umn.edu/communication/chapter/1-2-the-communication-process/#:%7E:text=The%20transmission%20model%20of%20communication%20describes%20communication%20as%20a%20one,by%20environmental%20or%20semantic%20noise.">transmission model</a> of communications describes the technical movement of a signal over a channel and across a distance. But this is a poor description of presidential rhetoric. </p>
<p>Too often we think that the complex, human task of communication is the same as the technical process of transmission. We worry whether someone “gets” our suggestions. When the president’s doctors update us on his health status, we assume that they’re just “giving” us information. “Giving” and “getting” are verbs of transmission. </p>
<p>Parsing the information transmitted by a president, determining whether it’s true or false or what’s really going on, is an ineffective way to understand what Trump’s words actually achieve. It doesn’t matter whether the information he transmits is accurate or inaccurate, and we make a mistake when we focus too much on accuracy and inaccuracy.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1311225520814776320"}"></div></p>
<p>Then what to focus on? </p>
<p>What I and many others call the “rhetorical model of communication” suggests that words have impact, and that meaning is an outcome of the effects words produce. About 2,400 years ago, <a href="https://iep.utm.edu/gorgias/">Gorgias</a>, the famous <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sophists/">sophist</a> and democratic theorist, argued that words had a similar effect as drugs on the body. <a href="https://www.ancient.eu/Greek_Medicine/">Ancient Athenian soothsayers would speak to the wounds of soldiers in battle</a> in hopes that their words would heal. </p>
<p>So instead of asking whether a president’s rhetoric is true or false, instead of trying to interpret the information presented in order to receive an accurate sense of what Trump is really saying, we ought to start asking: What effect do the president’s words have on us? For example, what is the impact of his anti-mask mockery on his followers and on public health efforts to keep citizens safe?</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QiN-wANjTrc?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Trump mocks a reporter for wearing a mask during a news conference, courtesy of The Independent.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Evoke strong reactions</h2>
<p>Trump’s words are aimed at producing strong reactions. When he mocks mask-wearing, he knows that he’ll evoke a strong reaction from both the media and his followers, and he doesn’t seem to care about the accuracy of the information he’s transmitting. He knows that elections are not won or lost on policy ideas or rational voters making informed choices. They are won or lost on the basis of the effects produced by the candidate’s words. </p>
<p>Those effects drive us to the polls and motivate us to act and reason in specific ways. </p>
<p>I’ve taught rhetoric and communication classes for 20 years, and in almost every class, I begin by telling my students to pay more attention to the effects their words have on others and not the information they wish to convey. This president has surely mastered that lesson. He speaks with the intent of producing the strongest possible impact and cares not at all about the information transmitted.</p>
<p>There is no mistaking the intended effects of this president’s rhetoric. He aims to create feelings of <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0002716218811309">resentment, distrust and suspicion</a>. Mapping the world in terms of “us” and “them” creates conflict (and is perhaps the cornerstone of fascist rhetoric). </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Trump points at a supporter while speaking." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/361493/original/file-20201004-22-w60rvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/361493/original/file-20201004-22-w60rvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/361493/original/file-20201004-22-w60rvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/361493/original/file-20201004-22-w60rvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/361493/original/file-20201004-22-w60rvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/361493/original/file-20201004-22-w60rvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/361493/original/file-20201004-22-w60rvh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Trump gestures to supporters as he arrives at Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport on Sept. 30, 2020, in Minneapolis.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Conflict with those we resent and distrust drives attention — this is the ethos of the entertainment industry, reality television and thousands of years of theatre. Making us feel uncertain, anxious, fearful — this is what Trump’s words do, regardless of the information they transmit. <a href="https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-10-04/trump-coronavirus-diagnosis-trust">The uncertainty created by his doctors at Walter Reed</a> served this same function — they attracted attention via uncertainty.</p>
<p>The feelings Trump targets draw us in, make us pay attention to all of his transgressions and affect our relations with others who share our space. Attention is persuasion, because meaning is in the way we react to his words, not in the information he transmits. </p>
<h2>Amplifying Trump’s rhetoric</h2>
<p>Every time CNN or Fox News broadcasts <a href="https://deadline.com/2020/03/coronavirus-chris-hayes-don-lemon-1202896531/">the president’s news conferences</a>, they amplify the effects by spreading them to larger audiences. Trump knows this, and yet our news outlets continue to let it happen. </p>
<p>Why? </p>
<p>Because dramatic tension fuels attention, and Trump’s words work to generate tension, anxiety, conflict and therefore attention. We could parse the rhetorical tactics that typically generate the strongest reactions and easily see them in Trump’s words (hyperbole, <a href="https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/reification#:%7E:text=Reification%20is%20when%20you%20think,evil%20%E2%80%94%20as%20a%20material%20thing.">reification</a>, ad hominem attacks, ambiguity). But we ought to focus more on how we react in order to limit his ability to persuade.</p>
<p>The president’s words right now are affecting all of us; they are driving us from one another and creating battle lines like the plot of a good drama. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1313074061757554688"}"></div></p>
<p>Where are our soothsayers? Who will speak to our wounds in hopes of having the same affects as drugs on our bodies, like Gorgias believed? </p>
<p>Resistance to Trump requires changes in the way we react to his words. Like a parent who does not react to their children’s tantrums (which are designed to generate attention), we must react with neutrality and objectivity, not more insults or hyperbole. </p>
<p>To put it more succinctly: Saving democracy requires defying Trump’s words by reacting differently from what they typically prescribe or intend. We need to react with civility, care and calm to undo the cycle of attention and persuasion.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/147255/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert Danisch receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.</span></em></p>Because dramatic tension fuels attention, Trump’s words work to generate tension, anxiety and conflict. We need to react with civility, care and calm to undo the cycle of attention and persuasion.Robert Danisch, Associate Professor, Communications & Chair of Department of Communication Arts, University of WaterlooLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1289532019-12-19T11:52:09Z2019-12-19T11:52:09ZWhy people vote for politicians they know are liars<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/307898/original/file-20191219-11909-mrfp1r.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">'I can't believe I'm still here, either.'</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/hershey-pa-december-10-2019president-donald-1586066944">Evan El-Amin/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Britain recently elected a prime minister who <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/law/video/2019/sep/24/supreme-court-rules-prorogation-unlawful-void-and-of-no-effect-video">unlawfully shut down parliament</a> to escape democratic scrutiny and who tells blatant falsehoods whenever it suits him. Boris Johnson casually denies the presence of media <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-hospital-labour-activist-nhs-whipps-cross-london-a9112361.html">in front of TV cameras</a> and he <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/08/boris-johnson-goods-from-northern-ireland-to-gb-wont-be-checked-brexit">denies core elements</a> of his Brexit deal, such as the need for customs checks between Britain and Northern Ireland.</p>
<p>In 2016, US voters faced a choice between a presidential candidate whose campaign statements were accurate 75% of the time and another whose claims were false 70% of the time, <a href="https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/lists/people/comparing-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-truth-o-met/">according to one factchecking outlet</a>. Americans chose Donald Trump, who has made <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/">more than 13,000 false or misleading claims</a> since assuming office.</p>
<p>Trump’s approval ratings have remained <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/203207/trump-job-approval-weekly.aspx">largely stable for two years</a> and 77% of Republicans <a href="https://bit.ly/2FoZhqd">consider him to be honest</a>. Johnson was elected by a landslide and <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1179256/boris-johnson-news-prorogue-parliament-suspension-court-poll-brexit-the-queen">more than half the British public was unconcerned</a> by his shutting down parliament.</p>
<p>How is this possible? How can lying demagogues find traction in societies with proud histories of democracy and empiricism?</p>
<p>Are people insensitive to falsehoods? Do they not know whether things are true or false? Do people no longer care about truth?</p>
<p>The answers are nuanced and rest on the distinction between our conventional understanding of honesty and the notion of “authenticity”. The main element of honesty is factual accuracy whereas the main element of authenticity is an alignment between the public and private persona of a politician.</p>
<p>Research by my team has shown that American voters — including Trump supporters — <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160802">are responsive to corrections of Trump’s falsehoods</a>. That is, when people learn that a specific claim is false, they reduce their belief in that claim. However, in our results, there was no association between updating of beliefs and feelings towards Trump among his supporters. That is, support remained stable no matter how much people realised that Trump’s statements were inaccurate.</p>
<p>Voters may therefore understand perfectly well that a politician is lying, and they may discount falsehoods when they are pointed out. But the same voters seemingly tolerate being lied to without holding it against their favoured candidate. This disconnect between perceived accuracy and support for a politician has now been <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pops.12586">shown repeatedly</a> by our team and also by <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-019-09528-x">other researchers using a different methodology</a>.</p>
<p>But it does not follow that people have given up on truth and honesty in politics altogether.</p>
<p>Research led by Oliver Hahl of Carnegie Mellon University <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0003122417749632">has identified the specific circumstances</a> in which people accept politicians who lie. It is only when people feel disenfranchised and excluded from a political system that they accept lies from a politician who claims to be a champion of the “people” against the “establishment” or “elite”. Under those specific circumstances, flagrant violations of behaviour that is championed by this elite – such as honesty or fairness — can become a signal that a politician is an authentic champion of the “people” against the “establishment”.</p>
<p>For populist politicians, such as Trump and Johnson, who explicitly pit a mythical people against an equally mythical elite, blatant disregard for facts only underscores their authenticity in the eyes of supporters.</p>
<p>No amount of factchecking will reduce the appeal of Trump, Johnson, Duterte, Bolsonaro or any other populist demagogue around the world.</p>
<p>To defang demagogues, and to make lying unacceptable again, requires that voters regain trust in the political system. The <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0003122417749632">research by Hahl and his colleagues</a> also showed that when people consider a political system to be legitimate and fair, they reject politicians who tell untruths and they resent being lied to. So the key to moving on involves pursuing politics that reduce the appeal of populist demagogues and that create incentives for politicians to be more honest.</p>
<p>There is no quick and easy recipe for this process. But it is clear that we need to have a political conversation about income inequality. In 2015, two dozen hedge fund managers made more money than all the kindergarten teachers in the US combined, and billionaires now pay a lower tax rate <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/06/opinion/income-tax-rate-wealthy.html">than the rest of us</a>. It is unsurprising that <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/casp.2409">inequality has been identified</a> as one of the variables that has compromised the legitimacy of democracy in the eyes of so many people.</p>
<p>Johnson <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/09/refuses-to-look-at-picture-of-boy-forced-to-sleep-on-hospital-floor">refused to look at the snapshot</a> of a little boy with pneumonia who was forced to sleep on a hospital floor. Once that has become unacceptable, and once sick children find a bed in hospital, Johnson’s falsehoods will also no longer find traction.</p>
<h2>Another way is possible</h2>
<p>It is encouraging to note that in other countries with different political structures and policies, voters do not tolerate politicians’ lies. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180593">Research by my team conducted in Australia</a> has shown that Australian voters reduce their endorsement of politicians if they are revealed to be dishonest.</p>
<p>Using a methodology that exactly paralleled <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pops.12586">our study with American voters</a>, we found that, unlike in the US, corrections of Australian politicians’ falsehoods made participants much less inclined to support those candidates. This effect occurred irrespective of partisanship, meaning voters were intolerant of lies even if they came from their own side of politics.</p>
<p>In Australia, voting is mandatory and preferential. Everyone must vote or risk being fined, and voters rank their preferences among all parties. These measures help contain political polarisation, underscoring how the design of a political system can determine a country’s welfare.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-would-the-british-parliament-look-like-under-proportional-representation-128808">What would the British parliament look like under proportional representation?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/128953/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephan Lewandowsky receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Volkswagen Foundation, and the ESRC. He is an occasional and unpaid adviser to Facebook and Google, and he has contributed to work by the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.</span></em></p>‘They might be a liar but at least they’re honest.’Stephan Lewandowsky, Chair of Cognitive Psychology, University of BristolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1264852019-11-20T14:10:12Z2019-11-20T14:10:12ZBeyond fact-checking: 5 things schools should do to foster news literacy<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/302236/original/file-20191118-66957-s9z9cx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">News literacy involves understanding how news filters into the public domain.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/education-global-connectivity-graphic-concept-443957596?src=0272b3b5-8674-4571-9fa8-13d4f4980bc0-3-82">Rawpixel.com/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When it comes to news literacy, schools often emphasize fact-checking and hoax-spotting. But as I argue in <a href="https://www.routledge.com/News-Literacy-and-Democracy/Ashley/p/book/9781138625068">my book on news literacy</a>, schools must go deeper with how they teach the subject if they want to help students thrive in a democratic society. </p>
<p>As a 2019 poll shows that Americans <a href="https://apnews.com/c762f01370ee4bbe8bbd20f5ddf2adbe">struggle to know</a> if the information they find online is true, news literacy remains essential in student education.</p>
<p>Separating fact from fiction is a vital skill for civic engagement, but students can be good fact-checkers only if they have a broader understanding of how news and information are produced and consumed in the digital age. Here are five questions students should be taught to ask.</p>
<h2>1. What’s happening to real news?</h2>
<p>Fortunately, fake news is <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/02/health/fake-news-conservative-liberal.html">only a small part</a> of the information most people consume. But real news – where journalists are paid to produce original reporting about their communities – <a href="https://time.com/5349523/local-news-disappearing/">is disappearing</a> due to a combination of declining revenue and industry consolidation. Most people have <a href="https://www.journalism.org/2019/03/26/for-local-news-americans-embrace-digital-but-still-want-strong-community-connection/">no idea this is happening</a>. Hundreds of communities have <a href="https://www.poynter.org/business-work/2018/about-1300-u-s-communities-have-totally-lost-news-coverage-unc-news-desert-study-finds/">lost all local news</a>, and both print and digital outlets <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/08/01/newspaper-layoffs-digital-journalism-job-cuts-pew-research-center/1877757001/">face layoffs and cuts</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.journalism.org/2018/09/10/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/">Most people say</a> they get news from social media even though they <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/edelman-survey-shows-low-trust-in-social-media/">don’t really trust it</a>, and sites like Facebook and Google <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/2/20/18232433/digital-advertising-facebook-google-growth-tv-print-emarketer-2019">soak up the majority</a> of digital ad revenue without producing any original content. It’s important to avoid fake news, but it’s even more important to seek out and engage with real news. That means cutting out social media middlemen and sticking with established brands that do their own reporting, hold themselves accountable for errors and minimize conflicts of interest.</p>
<h2>2. How is news constructed?</h2>
<p>Even at its best, news is a representation of reality, not reality itself. News producers desperate to get “both sides” of a story can create false equivalence, as they have on issues like <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/01/10/how-fossil-fuel-industry-got-media-think-climate-change-was-debatable/">global warming</a> where only one side is supported by <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/">actual evidence</a>. An obsession with balance suggests there are always two equal and opposite sides to every story even when this is not the case.</p>
<p>News stories are framed in ways that affect how we view things. When it comes to elections, for instance, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/campaign-journalism-needs-an-overhaul-heres-one-radical-idea/2019/01/07/76f7bf18-1276-11e9-90a8-136fa44b80ba_story.html">horse-race coverage</a> dominates. There is a narrow focus on polling and scandal. Actual policy coverage is often scant, as it was during the <a href="https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/">2016 election</a>. News frames also can lead to <a href="https://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/news-media/racial-bias-reporting-research-trends/">misrepresentations of minority groups</a> in news coverage, which can create and perpetuate harmful stereotypes. When we critique news, it’s easy to get distracted by a desire to root out political bias. But to be news literate, one should pay more attention to the routine practices that influence news content.</p>
<h2>3. Am I in a filter bubble?</h2>
<p>It’s tempting to think of the digital media giants as indifferent information services that simply prioritize the most important news and information. However, that’s far from the reality. Algorithms are the <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/cover_story/2016/01/how_facebook_s_news_feed_algorithm_works.html">secret computer code that try to predict</a> what will keep you engaged, and they’re baked into news feeds, search results, recommendations, trending topics and autocomplete.</p>
<p>Algorithms based on popularity <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/05/09/how-misinformation-spreads-on-social-media-and-what-to-do-about-it/">can amplify</a> all kinds of <a href="https://datasociety.net/output/media-manipulation-and-disinfo-online/">misinformation</a> and <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/22/tech/twitter-algorithm-political-rhetoric/index.html">extremist rhetoric</a> that serves only to mislead, confuse, anger and divide. </p>
<p>Algorithms also <a href="https://theconversation.com/misinformation-and-biases-infect-social-media-both-intentionally-and-accidentally-97148">reflect our own biases</a> and can cater to our preexisting beliefs, even those that are false, by showing us more of what we already think we know. Fears about algorithmic <a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/eli_pariser_beware_online_filter_bubbles?language=en">filter bubbles</a> may <a href="https://medium.com/trust-media-and-democracy/avoiding-the-echo-chamber-about-echo-chambers-6e1f1a1a0f39">have been overblown</a>, but there is still a need to be on guard against <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0093650217719596">confirmation bias</a>, where we favor information that fits with our beliefs.</p>
<h2>4. Am I the customer or the product?</h2>
<p>In today’s digital economy, the race is on among multi-billion-dollar companies like Facebook and Google to <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/234876/the-attention-merchants-by-tim-wu/">get and keep your attention</a> in order to make money. Selling eyeballs to advertisers is a century-old business model, but the internet makes pre-digital advertising look quaint. The trail of digital data you leave – both <a href="https://www.internetsociety.org/tutorials/your-digital-footprint-matters/">online</a> and <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-30/google-and-mastercard-cut-a-secret-ad-deal-to-track-retail-sales">offline</a> – is what makes you especially valuable. Some digital marketers claim to have as many as <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/what-did-cambridge-analytica-really-do-for-trumps-campaign/">5,000 data points</a> on the average American, as we learned from the Cambridge Analytica <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-scandal-fallout.html">scandal</a>.</p>
<p>Data, it is often said, is now a <a href="https://www.economist.com/leaders/2017/05/06/the-worlds-most-valuable-resource-is-no-longer-oil-but-data">more valuable commodity than oil</a>, and it’s used to manipulate our behavior through product ads and political messages. It’s a far cry from the <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/19/16792306/fcc-net-neutrality-open-internet-history-free-speech-anonymity">democratic ideals</a> of the early internet, and news literacy requires knowledge of these hidden costs of going online so we can make informed decisions about where we choose to direct our attention.</p>
<h2>5. Is there a better way to support a well-informed society?</h2>
<p>As my students ask, why does it have to be so hard to get reliable information? It’s almost like it’s difficult by design. Like fish in water, we are immersed in this news environment, which can make it hard to consider alternatives. But if we exercise our <a href="https://www.sociologyatwork.org/sociological-imagination/">sociological imaginations,</a> we can step back and ask what we really want for ourselves and our society. What would an ideal news environment look like?</p>
<p>If we think of <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1464884917730945">news as a public good</a> like clean air or water, it’s easy to see how we could all benefit from a news environment that’s at least partly protected from toxic commercial pressures. Most other democratic nations <a href="https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/4779/1884">far outspend the U.S.</a> on independent, nonpartisan public and nonprofit media, which <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0267323108098943">helps support</a> a more informed and engaged citizenry. Many governments also have <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/foreign-governments-are-fed-social-media-threatening-prison-tech-employees-n993841">increased oversight of social media</a> to target misinformation and protect privacy.</p>
<p>News literacy alone is not a panacea, but by asking some simple questions, we can start to make sure every citizen is equipped with the knowledge they need to navigate the news landscape and make democracy work.</p>
<p>[ <em>You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=youresmart">You can read us daily by subscribing to our newsletter</a>. ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126485/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Seth Ashley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The effective teaching of news literacy needs to go beyond simple fact-checking, a journalism professor argues.Seth Ashley, Associate Professor of Journalism and Media Studies, Boise State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1164642019-05-02T14:47:27Z2019-05-02T14:47:27ZWhy restoring accuracy will help journalism win back credibility<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/272257/original/file-20190502-103057-1n58vqd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">DesignRage/Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>As a journalist and <a href="https://scholar.google.co.za/citations?hl=en&user=yvKy0CwAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate">a media academic</a>, I have always assumed that I’m a fairly savvy media consumer. I know when something is genuine, and when what I’m looking at misinformation, disinformation and propaganda.</p>
<p>But, during a recent event held in Johannesburg to mark <a href="https://factcheckingday.com/">International Fact-Checking Day</a> (which is observed on April 2 every year), I realised that even savvy readers can get it wrong. At the event, hosted by the fact-checking organisations <a href="https://africacheck.org/">Africa Check</a> and <a href="https://firstdraftnews.org/">First Draft News</a>, participants were presented with examples of stories, videos and images and asked to verify these. </p>
<p>One of the pictures showed a baby lion and a baby elephant strolling along together. It was apparently taken in South Africa’s Kruger National Park. It turned out to be a photo shopped image. I was horrified: I had shared that very photograph a few months ago, touched by this supposedly sweet moment between two natural enemies.</p>
<p>For the rest of the event, a partner and I agonised about what was real and what was not. It took us hours, and we didn’t always get it right. This was a salutary reminder of how laborious, time-consuming and complex fact-checking, and why experts in the field are so crucial.</p>
<p>There are several threats to trust in the media. One is the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-demise-of-specialist-reporters-is-a-loss-for-any-democracy-107196">decimation of senior staff</a> in newsrooms and the removal of people from key jobs such as sub-editing – a key competency, since sub-editors ensured that stories were edited and checked. Companies have made these cuts because they’re not making the profits they once did.</p>
<p>In parallel, social media is growing – and growing. For instance, today there are <a href="https://www.bizcommunity.com/Article/196/19/183501.html">more than 20 million Facebook users</a> in South Africa. Many South Africans, especially in the middle class, rely on Twitter for much of their news. But too often, it’s not purely news that they get: instead, they find rumour, gossip, slander and hate. Many stories online contain grains of truth and a smattering of falsehoods. This is the age we live in, and it is crucial that fact-checkers be in place to help media consumers guard against those falsehoods.</p>
<h2>The role of fact checking</h2>
<p>Sub-editors used to fulfil a lot of the fact-checking function in newsrooms. But during the economic recession of 2008, they started losing their jobs. This is true <a href="http://www.thejournalist.org.za/the-craft/journalist-bloodbath-new-beat-research-to-find-out-what-happens-to-journos-and-journalism">around the world</a>, including <a href="http://journalism.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/906-STATE-OF-THE-NEWSROOM-2018-REPRINT-V3.pdf">in South Africa</a> where I work and conduct my research.</p>
<p>Traditionally, sub-editors did basic fact checks on articles. They would pick up incorrect dates, or point out when captions and photographs didn’t “match”. In the past decade or so in South Africa, media organisations trying to save money have created “sub hubs”: they centralise sub-editing services, and one sub-editor will end up contracted to two or three or even more titles.</p>
<p>Many of the sub-editors in these set-ups are not particularly senior, lacking the institutional memory that would allow them to detect factual errors. And those who do remain have no particular loyalty to one title, so feel less pressure to thoroughly, rigorously check facts – a process that takes enormous time, especially when you are editing scores of stories each day.</p>
<p>What should replace those full-time, dedicated sub-editors? I believe that fact-checkers could be employed instead. </p>
<p>This is the only way in which countries in Africa can really grapple with the rise – and rise – of misinformation, propaganda and disinformation, then newsrooms should consider hiring teams of full-time fact-checkers. This is already happening in some newsrooms elsewhere in the world; the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/spotlight/fact-checks">New York Times</a>, and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0d1cd82d3755">The Washington Post</a>, for instance, have added fact-checkers to their teams.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-demise-of-specialist-reporters-is-a-loss-for-any-democracy-107196">Why the demise of specialist reporters is a loss for any democracy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A similar intervention can ease the pressure on already hugely overburdened reporters, a situation I’ve written about before; improve trust in media organisations; and help audiences navigate the glut of “fake news” that dominates so many spaces.</p>
<h2>The threat from digital media</h2>
<p>In many ways, media organisations – and in fact the broader public – have been caught on the back foot by the rise of misinformation and disinformation. It’s as though digitisation caught everyone off guard. Of course, that’s not entirely true: even 20 years ago, there was an acknowledgement that traditional media would change and be overtaken by digital developments.</p>
<p>But people didn’t anticipate the malicious consequences of these developments. With more places to access information, and to do so more quickly, digitisation has led to the spread of disinformation.</p>
<p>The result is that social media has become a megaphone for the populist, right-wing trajectory that’s happening all over the world – from the US to Hungary, Turkey and some parts of Africa.</p>
<h2>Pressure</h2>
<p>Some may argue that journalists themselves should be responsible for fact-checking their stories. The reality is that they can’t. It takes a lot of time to do this properly, and journalists are under <a href="https://research.gold.ac.uk/2128/1/Witschge_Nygren_Journalism_as_profession.pdf">tremendous pressure</a> to produce <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2017.1355026">more and more stories</a> each day, and to do more with less, including perform on social media. That’s the way journalism is structured right now.</p>
<p>If modern newsrooms are serious about producing good journalism, and fighting back against the proliferation of falsehoods that dominate so much of the news cycle today, professional fact-checkers are crucial. This is imperative for titles to survive. Journalism will be saved by good journalism, and good journalism happens when media organisations invest in things like fact-checking.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/116464/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Glenda Daniels is affiliated with Sanef where she is a Council member and chairs the Diversity and Ethics committee. She receives funding from the NRF.</span></em></p>This is the age we live in, and it is crucial that fact-checkers be in place to help media consumers guard against falsehoods.Glenda Daniels, Associate Professor in Media Studies, University of the WitwatersrandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1118482019-02-14T20:22:59Z2019-02-14T20:22:59ZNo, Wikipedia didn’t get Oscar-winning actress Olivia Colman’s birthdate wrong<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/258982/original/file-20190214-1733-ju7xx2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=38%2C0%2C4318%2C2740&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Olivia Colman in _The Favorite_.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">20th Century Fox</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Who hasn’t heard about <a href="https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?cat=34&q=%2Fm%2F061d58">actress Olivia Colman</a> in recent weeks? Not only did she win a Golden Globe for her role in <em>The Favourite</em>, she took home the much-coveted <a href="https://theconversation.com/oscars-2019-olivia-colman-wins-best-actress-but-yet-again-hollywood-shows-it-thinks-film-making-is-a-man-thing-109534">best-actress Oscar</a>. </p>
<p>During her numerous interviews, one of the many anecdotes that Colman tells <a href="http://www.david-tennant.co.uk/2019/01/david-tennant-does-podcast-with-olivia.html">concerns Wikipedia</a>. In the “free encyclopedia that anyone can edit”, Colman apparently discovered that her birthdate was incorrect – the article unkindly made her eight years older than she actually was. When telling the story she reports that she sent “them” an e-mail to request a correction, that their response said she had to provide a birth certificate to prove it. While this initially provoked her outrage, it also gave the British actress a juicy anecdote that ridicules Wikipedia – just the kind of anecdote loved by media such as <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/olivia-colman-reveals-battle-with-wikipedia-over-her-age-11619990">Sky News</a>, <a href="https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/olivia-colman-says-part-aa-13915400"><em>The Daily Mirror</em></a>, <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/olivia-colman-reveals-wikipedia-battle-to-change-birthday-after-she-was-aged-by-eight-years-a4050726.html"><em>The Evening Standard</em></a>, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI"><em>The Daily Mail</em></a>, <a href="https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/celebrities/news/a26057928/olivia-colman-reveals-struggle-wikipedia-age/"><em>Harper’s Bazaar</em></a> and even <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/olivia-colman-wikipedia-age-the-favourite-oscars-2019-best-actress-david-tennant-podcast-a8749821.html"><em>The Independent</em></a>.</p>
<h2>Full archives</h2>
<p>Yet it’s easy to trace the dynamics of any Wikipedia article from the day it was created until the present: <em>all</em> successive versions of every article are archived and accessible via the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Olivia_Colman&action=history">“view history” tab</a> at the top right. In the case of the “Olivia Colman” article in English, among thousands of successive versions, one can verify that the first time that the (correct) birthdate of the British actress was inserted <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=48554622&oldid=48444597&title=Olivia_Colman&type=revision&diffmode=source">was in 2006</a> and that it remained unchanged until 2019.</p>
<p>How Olivia Colman saw in Wikipedia an error ageing her by eight years remains a mystery. Once she started to tell her story in interviews, however, things changed fast – by January 28, her birthdate had been modified <a href="https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Olivia_Colman#month-counts">dozens of times</a> in a few hours, rewarding her with a flurry of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Olivia_Colman&diff=prev&oldid=880618268&diffmode=source">extravagant ages</a>. To stop the avalanche of vandalism that this kind of buzzing inevitably provokes, Wikipedia administrators then made the page <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Olivia_Colman&type=revision&diff=880618281&oldid=880618268&diffmode=source">semi-protected</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SYb-wkehT1g?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Interestingly, <em>The Independent</em> shows two screenshots of the Wikipedia article with the right and then wrong birthdate. They mention that the incorrect birthdate is in fact from a screenshot taken <em>after</em> the announcement, but not that the whole story was proven entirely wrong: In the “view history” section of Colman’s article, not one has the incorrect birthdate <em>before</em> the story came out. Yet it would have been very easy for <em>The Independent</em>‘s writers to verify this.</p>
<p>Wikipedians actually did the work of fact-checking within the sources and the archives, and the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Olivia_Colman#Birth_Date_Controversy">report of their findings</a> is itself archived and accessible in the article’s “discussion” page. It was even mentioned as a brief in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2019-01-31/In_the_media">The Signpost</a>, the Wikipedian magazine. (This sparked the idea for this article, for which the author is indebted to them.)</p>
<h2>The ideal villain</h2>
<p>What is then the explanation for this fuss? It is not impossible that Olivia Colman confused Wikipedia and another site. For example, in 2011 the actress Joan Collins <a href="https://twitter.com/Joancollinsdbe/status/112473160372334592">tweeted</a> that Wikipedia had mistakenly stated that she had an affair with a certain Arthur Lowe. After <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Joan_Collins/Archive_1#Arthur_Lowe">checking the facts</a>, Wikipedians found that Collins was in fact referring to an <a href="http://www.nndb.com/people/802/000022736/">obscure site</a> that had nothing to do with Wikipedia (and information she denied is <a href="http://www.nndb.com/people/802/000022736/">still there</a> eight years later, by the way). Is there a biographic fact mentioned on the web that’s incorrect? Then surely it’s Wikipedia!</p>
<p>It happens that in the media world (and also in academia), Wikipedia is the “usual suspect”. One has to be wary of the Internet, especially in times of fake news, and it’s certainly true that in Wikipedia, anyone can write anything. As such, it is regularly <a href="https://theconversation.com/wikipedia-pour-une-critique-pertinente-69110">accused</a> of not being reliable, compared to the legitimate sources of information that are professional journalism and academy.</p>
<p>Wikipedia has been one of the most visited sites for 18 years, since its inception. Yet the inner workings of the online encyclopedia are so little known to the general public that such baseless assertions are considered credible. It is all the more surprising because Wikipedia carries archiving and transparency principles within its rules and practices. Those principles, which can be traced back to the free software movement that <a href="https://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/W/bo19085555.html">inspired Wikipedia</a>, are underpinned by the traceability that is one of its foundations.</p>
<p>Some advice for Olivia Colman: rather than “sending an e-mail to Wikipedia”, she can edit Wikipedia herself, like everyone else. And if someone tells her “she has to show a birth certificate”, then she should be interested in what Wikipedia actually requires: not primary sources like birth certificates, but <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2NVH21MEe0">secondary ones</a> – publicly available sources in which her birthdate is mentioned.</p>
<h2>A challenge for actresses</h2>
<p>This anecdote reveals something else about Wikipedia’s image in the media. The encyclopedia has (literally) bad press among well-known people, whether they are actors, journalists, academics or politicians. It is safe to say that this is connected to the fact that the idea they have about the reliability of Wikipedia is largely influenced by what they see in the article that is of concern to them: <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/09/fashion/Wikipedia-Judith-Newman.html">their own page</a>. It is often unpleasant to <em>not</em> master a page that speaks about oneself. In the case of movie actresses, the stakes are high. The Wikimedia Foundation often receives requests for information removal, or even unfounded threats of legal action. The major part of them come from representatives of actresses seeking to remove from the encyclopedia the (true) birthdate of their clients. Olivia Colman took advantage of this anecdote to bravely assert her age to the general public, and this makes her an exception in Hollywood.</p>
<p>One could interpret this remark as misogynous and mocking the coquetry of women: It is quite the opposite. These women are indeed working in a ruthless industry. This industry is very well known for its <a href="https://www.stylist.co.uk/people/olivia-colman-ageism-feminism-the-favourite-golden-globes-red-carpet-sexism-celebrity-news/244604">ageism</a>, and this affects actresses far more than actors. What is revealed here is rather the extraordinary pressure of this industry on its female employees. In this sense, the anecdote Olivia Colman tells that, if it does not do justice to Wikipedia, it has the virtue of pointing the issue of discrimination against women in the Western entertainment industry. Happy birthday, Olivia!</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/111848/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alexandre Hocquet ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.</span></em></p>Olivia Colman has a funny story to tell on Wikipedia about the age displayed in her biography in the online encyclopedia. The opportunity for a Wikipedia fact-checking.Alexandre Hocquet, Professeur des Universités en Histoire des Sciences, Université de LorraineLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/939972018-03-30T03:09:06Z2018-03-30T03:09:06ZWhy you stink at fact-checking<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212708/original/file-20180329-189798-1e5kzp3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=440%2C350%2C4805%2C3341&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">We don't automatically question information we read or hear.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/true-false-choice-on-keyboard-490626529">Gaelfphoto/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Here’s a quick quiz for you:</p>
<ul>
<li>In the biblical story, what was Jonah swallowed by?</li>
<li>How many animals of each kind did Moses take on the Ark? </li>
</ul>
<p>Did you answer “whale” to the first question and “two” to the second? Most people do … even though they’re well aware that it was Noah, not Moses who built the ark in the biblical story.</p>
<p>Psychologists <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=AUtiwQQAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">like me</a> call this phenomenon <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00273">the Moses Illusion</a>. It’s just one example of how people are very bad at picking up on factual errors in the world around them. Even when people know the correct information, they often fail to notice errors and will even go on to use that incorrect information in other situations. </p>
<p>Research from cognitive psychology shows that people are naturally poor fact-checkers and it is very difficult for us to compare things we read or hear to what we already know about a topic. In what’s been called an era of “fake news,” this reality has important implications for how people consume journalism, social media and other public information. </p>
<h2>Failing to notice what you know is wrong</h2>
<p>The Moses Illusion has been studied repeatedly since the 1980s. It occurs with a variety of questions and the key finding is that – even though people know the correct information – they don’t notice the error and proceed to answer the question.</p>
<p>In the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90165-1">original study</a>, 80 percent of the participants failed to notice the error in the question despite later correctly answering the question “Who was it that took the animals on the Ark?” This failure occurred even though participants were warned that some of the questions would have something wrong with them and were given an example of an incorrect question.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212700/original/file-20180329-189830-2fvsmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212700/original/file-20180329-189830-2fvsmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212700/original/file-20180329-189830-2fvsmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212700/original/file-20180329-189830-2fvsmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212700/original/file-20180329-189830-2fvsmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=392&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212700/original/file-20180329-189830-2fvsmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212700/original/file-20180329-189830-2fvsmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212700/original/file-20180329-189830-2fvsmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=492&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Who lined the animals up two by two?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Noahs_Ark.jpg">Edward Hicks</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Moses Illusion demonstrates what psychologists <a href="http://marshlab.psych.duke.edu/publications/MarshCantorBrashier2016.pdf">call knowledge neglect</a> – people have relevant knowledge, but they fail to use it. </p>
<p>One way my colleagues and I have studied this knowledge neglect is by having people read fictional stories that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00092-5">contain true and false information about the world</a>. For example, one story is about a character’s summer job at a planetarium. Some information in the story is correct: “Lucky me, I had to wear some huge old space suit. I don’t know if I was supposed to be anyone in particular – maybe I was supposed to be Neil Armstrong, the first man on the moon.” Other information is incorrect: “First I had to go through all the regular astronomical facts, starting with how our solar system works, that Saturn is the largest planet, etc.”</p>
<p>Later, we give participants a trivia test with some new questions (Which precious gem is red?) and some questions that relate to the information from the story (What is the largest planet in the solar system?). We reliably find positive effects of reading the correct information within the story – participants are more likely to answer “Who was the first person to step foot on the moon?” correctly. We also see negative effects of reading the misinformation – participants are both less likely to recall that Jupiter is the largest planet and they are more likely to answer with Saturn. </p>
<p>These negative effects of reading false information occur even when the incorrect information directly contradicts people’s prior knowledge. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028649">In one study</a>, my colleagues and I had people take a trivia test two weeks before reading the stories. Thus, we knew what information each person did and did not know. Participants still learned false information from the stories they later read. In fact, they were equally likely to pick up false information from the stories when it did and did not contradict their prior knowledge. </p>
<h2>Can you improve at noticing incorrect info?</h2>
<p>So people often fail to notice errors in what they read and will use those errors in later situations. But what can we do to prevent this influence of misinformation?</p>
<p>Expertise or greater knowledge seems to help, but it <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2016.1152377">doesn’t solve the problem</a>. Even biology graduate students will attempt to answer distorted questions such as “Water contains two atoms of helium and how many atoms of oxygen?” – though they are less likely to answer them than history graduate students. (The pattern reverses for history-related questions.) </p>
<p>Many of the interventions my colleagues and I have implemented to try to reduce people’s reliance on the misinformation have failed or even backfired. One initial thought was that participants would be more likely to notice the errors if they had more time to process the information. So, we presented the stories in a book-on-tape format and slowed down the <a href="https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.1.180">presentation rate</a>. But instead of using the extra time to detect and avoid the errors, participants were even more likely to produce the misinformation from the stories on a later trivia test.</p>
<p>Next, we tried <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2010.543908">highlighting the critical information in a red font</a>. We told readers to pay particular attention to the information presented in red with the hope that paying special attention to the incorrect information would help them notice and avoid the errors. Instead, they paid additional attention to the errors and were thus more likely to repeat them on the later test. </p>
<p>The one thing that does seem to help is to act like a professional fact-checker. When participants are instructed to edit the story and highlight any inaccurate statements, they are <a href="https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0339-0">less likely to learn misinformation</a> from the story. Similar results occur when participants read the stories sentence by sentence and <a href="https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193260">decide whether each sentence contains an error</a>.</p>
<p>It’s important to note that even these “fact-checking” readers miss many of the errors and still learn false information from the stories. For example, in the sentence-by-sentence detection task participants caught about 30 percent of the errors. But given their prior knowledge they should have been able to detect at least 70 percent. So this type of careful reading does help, but readers still miss many errors and will use them on a later test.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212713/original/file-20180329-189798-1rxpa05.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212713/original/file-20180329-189798-1rxpa05.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/212713/original/file-20180329-189798-1rxpa05.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212713/original/file-20180329-189798-1rxpa05.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212713/original/file-20180329-189798-1rxpa05.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212713/original/file-20180329-189798-1rxpa05.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212713/original/file-20180329-189798-1rxpa05.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/212713/original/file-20180329-189798-1rxpa05.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Our natural mode isn’t to critically push back against all information we encounter.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://pixabay.com/en/reading-newspapaer-newspaper-man-2706960/">hitesh014/Pixabay.com</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Quirks of psychology make us miss mistakes</h2>
<p>Why are human beings so bad at noticing errors and misinformation? Psychologists believe that there are at least two forces at work. </p>
<p>First, people have a general bias to <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.46.2.107">believe that things are true</a>. (After all, most things that we read or hear are true.) In fact, there’s some evidence that we initially process all statements as true and that it then takes cognitive effort to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.65.2.221">mentally mark them as false</a>.</p>
<p>Second, people tend to accept information as long as it’s close enough to the correct information. Natural speech often includes errors, pauses and repeats. (“She was wearing a blue – um, I mean, a black, a black dress.”) One idea is that to maintain conversations we need to go with the flow – accept information that is “good enough” and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00158">just move on</a>.</p>
<p>And people don’t fall for these illusions when the incorrect information is obviously wrong. For example, people don’t try and answer the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90165-1">question</a> “How many animals of each kind did Nixon take on the Ark?” and people don’t believe that Pluto is the largest planet after reading it in a <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13421-013-0359-9">fictional story</a>.</p>
<p>Detecting and correcting false information is difficult work and requires fighting against the ways our brains like to process information. Critical thinking alone won’t save us. Our psychological quirks put us at risk of falling for misinformation, disinformation and propaganda. <a href="https://factcheckingday.com/">Professional fact-checkers provide an essential service</a> in hunting out incorrect information in the public view. As such, they are one of our best hopes for zeroing in on errors and correcting them, before the rest of us read or hear the false information and incorporate it into what we know of the world.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/93997/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lisa Fazio receives funding from the Rita Allen Foundation. </span></em></p>Cognitive psychologists know the way our minds work means we not only don’t notice errors and misinformation we know are wrong, we also then remember them as true.Lisa Fazio, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Vanderbilt UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/384262015-03-10T03:33:06Z2015-03-10T03:33:06ZFactCheck: can you change a violent drinking culture by changing how people drink?<blockquote>
<p>You can’t change a culture by simply changing drinking. It is, of course, justifiable to explore the effectiveness of small measures such as advertising restrictions, increases or decreases in price, relaxation or restriction of hours, but such things tinker at the margins of culture and it is doubtful that they will alter the culture of violence and anti-social behaviour in any meaningful way. – Dr Anne Fox, author of a <a href="http://www.lionco.com/content/u12/Dr%20Anne%20Fox%20report.pdf">report</a> released by the Lion alcohol company, January 2015.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Lion alcohol company recently released a <a href="http://www.lionco.com/content/u12/Dr%20Anne%20Fox%20report.pdf">report</a> on Australian and New Zealand nightlife and violence. The study was conducted by an English anthropologist, Dr Anne Fox, working with a private research company.</p>
<p>In this report, the author visited towns in Australia and New Zealand and reviewed the literature on various drinking cultures. Dr Fox concludes that you can’t change a culture by simply changing drinking patterns.</p>
<p>There is a fair bit of opinion involved in determining the role that “culture” plays in alcohol-fuelled violence. </p>
<p>Dr Fox says we should be focusing on violence, misogyny, and aggressive masculinity. These things play a role, though they are usually poorly defined and require more sophisticated <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24428187">research</a>.</p>
<p>However, the evidence shows that we <em>can</em> make a meaningful difference to curbing a culture of violence and anti-social behaviour by changing drinking patterns.</p>
<p>In fact, there is a massive body of independent research that demonstrates a lack of impact from so-called “culture change” interventions such as <a href="http://www.cochrane.org/CD006748/ADDICTN_social-norms-interventions-are-not-effective-enough-to-reduce-alcohol-misuse-among-university-or-college-students">social norms campaigns</a>, generic <a href="http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199551149.001.0001/acprof-9780199551149">education</a> in schools and occasional mass media campaigns warning of alcohol-related harm.</p>
<p>What the available evidence does show is that many assaults and hospital attendances that can be prevented by simple measures that alter drinking patterns, such as shutting licensed venues a few hours earlier. These measures cost the community very little compared to the vast expenditure on police and emergency services across Australia.</p>
<h2>Global data</h2>
<p>A rigorous body of experimental and observational evidence from around the world provides important insights into the real relationship between alcohol to violence, including that:</p>
<ul>
<li>If you shut the pubs and clubs in town two hours earlier, you see a <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20840191">30% to 40% reduction</a> in the number of assaults reported to police and the <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24612319">injuries turning up at emergency in hospital</a>.</li>
<li>If you stop repeat drink drivers from drinking, there is a <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23153129">10% reduction</a> in domestic violence cases reported to police state-wide.</li>
<li>People who receive alcohol are <a href="http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.486.6496&rep=rep1&type=pdf">more aggressive</a> than those who receive no alcohol or placebo beverages.</li>
<li>Intoxicated subjects <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00994162">are more likely</a> to administer electric shocks to others when provoked - and when they do shock others, they select a higher voltage.</li>
<li>Alcohol administration to men <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9830248">increases</a> the level of negative verbal behaviour displayed by the men and their partners. </li>
<li>Normally non-violent individuals can become violent <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10463811">when consuming a substantial amount of alcohol</a>. </li>
<li>Heavier consumption of alcohol results in <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12436812">conflict situations turning violent</a> between partners. </li>
<li>Alcohol use is more common among <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9122504">serious</a> physical assault <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1007522721430">events</a>.</li>
<li>Consumption of six or more drinks <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12602424">predicts</a> violent events in the family setting.</li>
<li>Blood alcohol content (BAC) of 0.19 was <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9830248">reported</a> in violent events compared to an estimated BAC of 0.11 in conflict events that did not include violence. </li>
<li>Treatment for alcohol dependence is associated with <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3215582/">reductions</a> in <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12602429">intimate partner</a> violence, and this reduction is <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7751486">observable</a> up to two years post-treatment.</li>
</ul>
<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12380856">For every hour</a> after midnight that pubs are open, there is a 15% to 20% increase in violence, drink driving <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24612319">and</a> emergency department attendances. Shutting pubs at 3:30am in Newcastle, NSW, rather than 5am, resulted in a <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20840191">37% decrease</a> in assaults. Paradoxically, there has been a <a href="http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/publications/monographs/monograph-46">25% increase</a> in liquor licences in Newcastle and people simply go out earlier and even spend more. </p>
<p>So we do know that straightforward measures such as shutting pubs earlier are <a href="http://www.ndlerf.gov.au/publications/monographs/monograph-43">meaningful</a> in the Australian context, but are extremely unpopular with industry. And across Australia there has been little action from political parties that <a href="http://www.fare.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Alcohol-Industry-Donations-to-Queensland-Political-Parties-20-January-2015-FINAL.pdf">receive</a> industry <a href="http://www.fare.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Alcohol-Industry-Donations-to-Political-Parties-25-November-FINAL.pdf">donations</a>.</p>
<h2>How does alcohol increase the likelihood of violence?</h2>
<p>Dr Fox makes anecdotal comparisons between countries such as Iceland, Spain and Italy. But put simply, Australia is not Italy. In Italy, when people drink, they drink <a>less</a> on any single drinking occasion than the <a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/lookup/4704.0Chapter756Oct+2010#bingedrinking">average</a> Australian. Dr Fox even relates a personal <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-27/macho-culture-to-blame-for-alcohol-fuelled-violence-dr-anne-fox/6270072">account</a> about how, one night when she was at a bar, some young men started to get rowdy and the bartender gave them whiskey to calm them down.</p>
<p>This might make an engaging story but it falls well short of scientific evidence. We don’t know what happened to the young men later that night when they met on the street outside or when they got home. Real violence often happens in the blink of an eye.</p>
<p>It is well-documented what happens to humans when they drink alcohol: reduced cognitive ability, disinhibition, inability to think of consequences, poor interpretation of social cues and obsessional thinking about single details.</p>
<p>These effects have been found in many studies and are <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.00994.x/abstract">reliably replicated</a> across many cultures. </p>
<p>Research from around the world has <a href="http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/world_report/factsheets/pb_violencealcohol.pdf">shown</a> that people are much more likely to be victims of alcohol-related violence when they are heavily intoxicated.</p>
<p>This is why we have responsible service of alcohol laws. When people are drunk, they make poor decisions, especially the decision to keep drinking.</p>
<h2>Verdict</h2>
<p>It’s not correct to say you can’t “alter the culture of violence and anti-social behaviour in any meaningful way” by tackling the way people drink. There is a lot of evidence showing that changing people’s drinking hours and consumption patterns reduces violence and hospital admissions – which is a lot more significant than tinkering at the margins of culture.</p>
<hr>
<h2>Review</h2>
<p>This review is a fair assessment of the question as to whether achieving cultural change is more effective than reducing alcohol related violence by curbing alcohol consumption. </p>
<p>As the reviewer rightly concludes, the evidence that measures to reduce consumption are effective is coherent and persuasive, while arguments to the contrary – including those put forward by Dr Fox – generally rely more on anecdote and intuition than empirical research.</p>
<p>Attempts to change Australia’s drinking culture using education campaigns have a poor record. At best, a small and temporary improvement is reported from some evaluations, while others show no change or even worse outcomes. The drinks industry is capable of spending many, many times more on continual and positive advertising than what governments can afford to spend on intermittent cautionary campaigns. This is not, and never has been, a level playing field. </p>
<p>The evidence is slowly accumulating for some control of alcohol advertising, marketing and promotion, as the current self-regulatory system is widely recognised to be worse than a joke. But no one should underestimate the political difficulties of achieving this. – <strong>Alex Wodak</strong></p>
<hr>
<p><div class="callout"> Have you ever seen a “fact” that doesn’t look quite right? The Conversation’s FactCheck asks academic experts to test claims and see how true they are. We then ask a second academic to review an anonymous copy of the article. You can request a check at checkit@theconversation.edu.au. Please include the statement you would like us to check, the date it was made, and a link if possible.</div></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/38426/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Miller receives funding from Australian Research Council and Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, grants from NSW Government, National Drug Law Enforcement Research Fund, Foundation for Alcohol Research and Education, Cancer Council Victoria, Queensland government and Australian Drug Foundation, travel and related costs from Australasian Drug Strategy Conference. He is affiliated with academic journal Addiction.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alex Wodak is president of the Australian Drug Law Reform Foundation.</span></em></p>There is a lot of evidence showing that changing people’s drinking hours and consumption patterns reduces violence and hospital admissions.Peter Miller, Principal Research Fellow, Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/177812013-09-06T02:02:18Z2013-09-06T02:02:18ZWhen 1+1=1: journalism and the trouble with ‘facts’<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/30645/original/cwgqngbp-1378257386.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There's no easily defined line between 'fact' and 'non-fact', so how do journalists make judgements about factual accuracy?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Image from shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A posse of fact-checkers has been riding the boundary of the federal election. Not happy with the standard of honesty in political discourse, <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/">the ABC</a>, this website and <a href="http://politifact.com.au/">PolitiFact.com.au</a>, a localised version of a US format, staffed mostly by ex-Fairfax journalists, set up operations to check facts in statements made by politicians and others during the campaign.</p>
<p>Isn’t fact-checking what journalists are meant to do already?</p>
<p>Of course it is. And they do. Facts are the building blocks of good reportage, the substance upon which a true and full record of history is built. They are gathered, checked and double-checked before being published in print, on television and radio, and online. At least, that’s the theory.</p>
<p>Journalism has changed. The conversation with the media audience has changed. The competition to be first with news means there is less time to check and confirm every line of a public figure’s statements. The multitude of new avenues for politicians to deliver their unfiltered message to its audience by going around the traditional gatekeepers of the media have changed the nature of information and of the political conversation.</p>
<p>Politicians know this and take advantage of these changes. Facts are spun, taken out of context, cherry-picked or cunningly applied to create a false impression. The fact-checkers’ challenge is how to strip away the noise, lay bare how facts are distorted and to expose the deceit built into the rhetoric of politics.</p>
<p>People think they know a fact when they see one. People should think again.</p>
<p>The truth is that “facts” can be tricky, elusive things.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/30653/original/zy94wbbm-1378258629.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/30653/original/zy94wbbm-1378258629.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30653/original/zy94wbbm-1378258629.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30653/original/zy94wbbm-1378258629.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30653/original/zy94wbbm-1378258629.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30653/original/zy94wbbm-1378258629.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30653/original/zy94wbbm-1378258629.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The theory is facts are gathered, checked and double-checked before being published, but that’s not always put into practice.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Image from shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Here are three facts most would accept on face value:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>1+1=2</p>
<p>Clive Palmer is overweight</p>
<p>The unemployment rate is 5.7%.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The equation 1+1= 2 is self-evident; simple observation and experience tell us it is true. But some cheeky mathematicians take delight in proving that 1+1=1 is <a href="http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/57110.html">also true</a>.</p>
<p>They conjure this surprise result by using a numerical sleight-of-hand known as a “mathematical fallacy”. This is, essentially, a well-camouflaged false step, and if you don’t spot the false step or know how to go through the mathematical working to pinpoint where it was introduced, you might be tempted or feel compelled to accept that 1+1=1.</p>
<p>A mathematical fallacy can be created on purpose, as a party trick to impress or challenge fellow numbers geeks at mathematics soirees. A mathematical fallacy can also be accidental, a simple, subtle miscalculation buried in the working that leads to an incorrect result. If not discovered, such mistakes could have potentially fatal consequences – for example, if the error is made by a designer of nuts and bolts used in bridges or space shuttles.</p>
<p>So, it is possible to believe that 1+1=1 is a fact if you don’t think to look for an error, don’t know how to look for an error, or if you don’t know there’s an error to be found. Everyone will know it is wrong, but only a few have the skills to know how to prove it is wrong.</p>
<p>Hold that thought.</p>
<p>Mining magnate Clive Palmer is a larger-than-life character whose physique matches his personality. Even a casual observer can see that he is overweight. But we don’t have to trust the observation of casual observers to know that the statement “Clive Palmer is overweight” is a fact because medical science gives us a definitional tool for the classification of body weight: the <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-overweight-obese-bmi-what-does-it-all-mean-7011">body mass index</a>.</p>
<p>The BMI correlates height and weight to arrive at a number. A person is considered to be underweight, overweight or to have a healthy body weight depending on where that number sits <a href="http://www.heartfoundation.org.au/healthy-eating/pages/bmi-calculator.aspx">on a spectrum</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/30648/original/k7j2zbk4-1378258101.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/30648/original/k7j2zbk4-1378258101.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=953&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30648/original/k7j2zbk4-1378258101.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=953&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30648/original/k7j2zbk4-1378258101.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=953&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30648/original/k7j2zbk4-1378258101.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1197&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30648/original/k7j2zbk4-1378258101.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1197&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30648/original/k7j2zbk4-1378258101.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1197&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Technically, St Kilda captain Nick Riewoldt is overweight.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP Image/Dave Hunt</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It’s safe to say that Clive Palmer’s BMI would categorise his weight as
above the ideal for his height. He would sit in the overweight or (according to my dietitian) the obese section of the spectrum.</p>
<p>But consider this: at 193 centimetres and 96 kilograms, Nick Riewoldt –
captain of St Kilda AFL club, superb athlete and fine specimen of a human
being – has a BMI of 25, categorising him as overweight. “Nick Riewoldt is overweight” is as much a fact as “Clive Palmer is overweight” is a fact. Crazy, I know.</p>
<p>Hold that thought, too.</p>
<p>According to the government department responsible for measuring unemployment, the current jobless rate is 5.7%. The statisticians in
the Australian Bureau of Statistics are experts, independent of political
influence, so we have good reason to trust that they know how to measure
unemployment in Australia. The 5.7 figure should be one we can accept as
fact.</p>
<p>But what is being measured? There is considerable debate about the value of unemployment figures. According to a <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/comment/smile-youre-on-candidate-camera-20130825-2sjrn.html">recent column in the Fairfax press</a> the rate does not include roughly 100,000 people who have been moved from the unemployed queues into training schemes. It also does not include those who have given up looking for work, those who work for a family business, or those who do just one hour of paid work each week. Include these categories and you get an unemployment rate of 6.2%.</p>
<p>These three examples help us understand that no fact is an island. Facts are constructed and constrained by social, historical, cultural, scientific and economic factors and cannot exist or be understood outside the context and connections created by those factors. Change the context or the connections and you change the fact. </p>
<p>Fact-checking operations know this and so parse context and connecting factors to arrive at their shades-of-truth rulings, with the tested fact sitting on a spectrum from True through to False via a range of incremental stages (for example PolitiFact’s ratings Half True/False, Partly True/False and Mostly True/False).</p>
<p>Epistemicism is the sub-branch of philosophy that deals with the question of vagueness and inexactness, that border area in which something is going from being one thing to being another. It considers such questions as: At what point does a thin thing become a not-thin thing? Is there a tangible, identifiable definitional line that separates these states?</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/30651/original/pv9v845b-1378258536.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/30651/original/pv9v845b-1378258536.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30651/original/pv9v845b-1378258536.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30651/original/pv9v845b-1378258536.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30651/original/pv9v845b-1378258536.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30651/original/pv9v845b-1378258536.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/30651/original/pv9v845b-1378258536.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Image from shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>If there is, we might ask, is there also a line between non-physical states such as “fact” and “not-a-fact” (or between “fact” and “not the fact supposedly being presented”)? That is, is there a “truth mass index” we can turn to for help, a version of the BMI that can be applied to fact?</p>
<p>And if there isn’t an easily defined line between “fact” and “non-fact”, on what basis do the fact-checkers think they can make judgements about factual accuracy?</p>
<p>The fact-checkers operate in this zone of vagueness and, in practice, they do an effective job. As experienced journalists they know how to examine and expose the rhetorical equivalents of mathematical fallacies. They can identify how definitions and assumptions around, say, unemployment figures have been warped or constructed to achieve a desired result.</p>
<p>Of course, there is argument about the nuances of fact-checkers’ rulings; in the real world that is where subjectivity enters proceedings, and there is no hard and fast way to calculate the impact of personal preference or opinion.</p>
<p>But even without a truth mass index, the checkers could rule that Nick Riewoldt is as healthy a specimen of a human being as you will find. They could also rule that Clive Palmer should stop eating hamburgers.</p>
<p>Because sometimes facts speak for themselves.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/17781/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gordon Farrer was a Fairfax journalist for 13 years.
Fairfax also holds a stake in his current employer, Metro Media Publishing. </span></em></p>A posse of fact-checkers has been riding the boundary of the federal election. Not happy with the standard of honesty in political discourse, the ABC, this website and PolitiFact.com.au, a localised version…Gordon Farrer, PhD candidate in the School of Media and Communication, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.