Thoughts from the Middle

Evaluating What You Read:  Media Literacy

By

Robert J. Fischer

“BOMBSHELL:  IT Expert And Global Defense Contractor Testifies In Italian Court That He And Others Rigged Machines To Switch Votes to Biden In US Election,” by A. M. Smith.  This is an actual post on Twitter from a site called en-Volve.  Is the statement true, false, or a combination of truth and falsehoods?  How do you know what to believe?  If it is true, then it supports the contention that the 2020 election was stolen from President Trump.  If it is false, then those who believe in the stolen election are being misled.

The first thing to note is the site enVolve.  Is it even a legitimate media outlet? A quick inquiry on the internet indicates that it is a verifiable site.  However, En-volve.com has this disclaimer on its “Website Terms of Use” page:

“The information presented on or through the Website is made available solely for general information and entertainment purposes. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We disclaim all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on such materials by you or any other visitor to the Website, or by anyone who may be informed of any of its contents.”

Furthermore, the site is registered through 1&1 Internet, a company that hides the identity and location of the owner of the website!

Evaluating Information

The consumer can spot fake news using the following suggestions:

• Read past the headline
• Check what news outlet published it
• Check the publish date and time
• Who is the author?
• Look at what links and sources are used
• Beware of confirmation bias (see the explanation below)
• Search other news outlets to see if they are reporting the same news
• Think before you share

.  Bias:  “Never trust a brain, especially your own . . .” This is an important observation made during a Ted Talk (http: theoatmeal.com/comics/believe.clean). The statement is based on metacognition—thinking about your own thinking.  All of us have a bias.  However, many fail to recognize that bias and the impact it has on filtering information that we receive and disseminate.  We all need to examine our assumptions and any inclination to fall for logistic fallacies.  We need to be critical thinkers. If we buy into everything that supports our inner bias, we are not using critical thinking

A good rule for evaluating information is simple:  If it is posted on social media by a friend, check to see where they got their information.  Often these posts are reposts of information that has been written by some person unknown to you.  Even if it supports your views, the information may not be true, so you are wise to disregard it and NOT repost.  A second rule is:  If the information is not posted by a known media source, disregard it, or at least spend a few minutes evaluating it, as exemplified by the above evaluation of the en-Volve post.  A good source for evaluation of sites that you don’t recognize is FactCheck.org Misinformation Directory. 

If the information is posted on known media sites, remember that many of these outlets have a bias.  The following is a general assessment of some of these outlets. 

Liberal leaning bias: Daily Kos, New Republic, BuzzFeed, Mother Jones, MSNBC, Vanity Fair, Daily Beast, Slate, Vox, Atlantic,

Conservative leaning bias: Fox News, One America News (OAN), Drudge Report, Federalist, The Washington Times, Examiner, National Review, Newsmax, The Blaze, New York Post

Mainstream with minimal partisanship bias: Reuters, AP, Bloomberg, NBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, BBC, PBS, Time, Aljazeera

Slightly left: Axios, Washington Post, The Guardian, Politico, The New York Times

Slightly right: Wall Street Journal, The Hill

Although some sources lean left or right, they may still present valuable and factual information. For example, Mother Jones is left-leaning; the Wall Street Journal and the Economist are right-leaning.  They are still credible news sources, but they likely present information from a certain perspective.  It is a good idea to consume information from sources with different points of view as long as the information presented is factual. 

It is also important to know if you are consuming news or editorial/opinion.  News is informative while editorial/opinion articles are designed to influence how you think. Hannity presents opinions, as does Rachel Maddow.  You are getting their opinions, not unfiltered news. 

It is equally important to remember that there is “good” news, “bad” news, and “fake news.”  Good news presents the facts and allows the consumer to make their own conclusions.  Good news is presented by organizations such as ABC, Reuters, NPR, Wall Street Journal. Bad news often contains errors and/or intentional bias, and the intent to sway the consumer to reach a certain opinion. Organizations such as the Daily Kos, Buzz Feed, Fox News, New Republic, One America News, and Drudge Report fall into this category. Fake news is made up—in other words, a false story or a LIE!  And as Adolf Hitler said, “Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it.” There is no debating that these sources are selling a particular idea with the hope that the consumer will accept the information as fact. This news is blatant propaganda. Sources which peddle propaganda are represented by The Blaze, Newsmax, Daily Caller, U. S. Uncut, and Occupy Democrats.  Beware of their tactics.  Some of these tactics are:

• Name-calling:  commie, pig, terrorist, fascist, socialist
• Glittery Generalities:  making the consumer believe that the presenter shares the consumer’s beliefs
• Euphemisms:  presenting ideas that often soften the message (i.e., civilian casualties are referred to as collateral damage, a rioter is referenced as a veteran and patriot)
• Transfer:  use of respected symbols to stir emotions (i.e., the Bible or cross)
• Testimonials:  can be good or bad  (e,g., a bad testimonial– when a person’s testimonial comes from someone who is not qualified to make a judgement)
• Band Wagon:  everyone is on board, follow the crowd
• Plain Folk: the ideas presented are those “of the people” (i.e., MAGA hats)
• Flag-waving: are you loyal?
• Black-white fallacy:  the fallacy is that there are only two choices when there are actually shades of gray
• Ad hominem:  straying from the argument to attack the person
• Manufactured outrage

  There is one more category that needs to be considered– satire.  Satire should not be considered factual news, although it is most often based on actual news events.  Forums like The Daily Show, Saturday Night Live’s “Weekend Update, or the Onion are meant to humorously analyze news stories or poke fun.  Unfortunately, there are those who will not separate the humor from reality.

Legal limits on false information

Evaluation of sources cannot be overemphasized!  Information that shapes opinions must be factual.  As noted in my last post, consumer information is subject to the Fair Reporting Act, and in general, publications and statements that are false are subject to civil suit for libel or slander.  Good decisions cannot be made when the information is not accurate. 

In the past week, Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat and YouTube banned President Trump from posting on their sites.  Google and Apple have removed Parler from their app store. Amazon has removed Parler from its platform.  These organizations have come to realize the damage that “alternative facts” have had on opinions.  But these measures are coming too late.  Even before the Trump era of “alternative facts,” fact-bending news organizations were disseminating information that distorted reality and manufactured outrage. The trend continues even as the events of January 6, 2021, were viewed live on national television.  For example, Newsmax downplayed the uprising as an antifa organized activity! 

In part, President Trump won the 2016 election by using media that suffered from poor control.  Discussions on social platforms were often unreasonable and hateful.  And when Facebook started monitoring its users, many turned to Parler because of its lax attention to the accuracy of posts.  Through his use of Twitter with over eighty million followers, Trump has been able to build a “cult” following that believes the “alternative facts” that he presents, and accepts his conspiracy theories.  It is interesting to note that a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that a majority of Republicans said they were more loyal to Trump than to the Republican Party. (Quoted from Giovanni Russonello, “On Politics,” The New York Times, January 11, 2021) Why do so many Republicans continue to believe in Donald Trump? This unwavering faith in Donald Trump is understandable when analyzed as a process in thinking, influenced by false information and a failure of the consumers to critically analyze what they are consuming. 

Summary

Major social platforms could ban various users, or at a minimum, continue to tag posts as false or misleading.  If this occurs, users may come to realize that their posts are opinions and not necessarily factual.  This country can heal as it has many times before, if and when people are presented with solid and factual information. Informed users can make good decisions if they take the time to evaluate their sources.. 

In summary, as citizens and leaders, our duty is the preservation of peace and freedom.  As President Kennedy had planned to say in his speech in Austin, Texas on the evening of November 22, 1963, “So let us not be petty when our cause is so great.  Let us not quarrel amongst ourselves when our Nation’s future is at stake.”