Tag Archives: misinformation

Why you need to focus on your own media literacy – & a New Year’s Resolution idea

images meant to look like cave drawings, one of a woman using a smartphone and one at a desktop computer.

We all have an obligation to increase our media literacy – every one of us. And I think every human resources office at every company, nonprofit, school, whatever, should consider it a mandate to educate staff regularly regarding media literacy.

The Center for Media Literacy (CML) defines media literacy as “a framework to access, analyze, evaluate, create and participate with messages in a variety of forms — from print to video to the Internet.” CML also notes that media literacy builds an understanding of the role of media in society as well as essential skills of inquiry and self-expression necessary for citizens of a democracy.

CML defines media literacy as the ability to:

  • Decode media messages (including the systems in which they exist);
  • Assess the influence of those messages on thoughts, feelings, and behaviors; and
  • Create media thoughtfully and conscientiously.

The ability to navigate within our complex and ever-changing media landscape depends on acquiring skills and tools to know how to consume and evaluate information, ask critical questions, avoid manipulation, and engage in digital spaces safely and confidently.

We already see the negative impact that media can have – is having – on people, including children. CML says that the negative impacts on children:

  • Online safety
  • Cyberbullying
  • Low self-esteem
  • Depression and suicide
  • Substance abuse and other risky behaviors
  • Negative body image
  • Reinforcement of stereotypes

They also note “incorrect information”, but this is also a big danger for adults as well, which can lead to violence, to economic instability, to poor, even deadly health choices, and to ill-informed political decisions that end up harming entire communities and countries.

CML’s resource library is primarily focused on young people, and the resources are excellent, but there’s also a huge need for better media literacy among adults – and not just the elderly. CML’s materials can certainly be adapted for adult audiences, and there are other resources as well, such as AARP’s Fraud Network Watch and the American Library Association (ALA)’s Media Literacy in the Library: A Guide for Library Practitioners (PDF) that offers resources and ideas to plan programs and activities to teach media literacy skills to adults. The latter is a resource for library staff, but anyone can use it.

Please understand: I have been online since 1994 or so. I have been advocating for people to leverage online tools and networks for decades. I don’t think the Internet has caused misinformation, bullying, depression, etc., but it has amplified misinformation to an astounding degree. Our online networked world has magnified or intensified messages and disinformation, vastly increasing the reach of such on a scale never, ever seen before. The way to meet this challenge is not to ban the Internet or online tools; it’s to raise all of our levels of online literacy.

I challenge you to accept that you – yes, YOU – have believed misinformation online. Every person has. Look for how you have: did you share a meme or story that turned out not to be true? Did you “like” a video that turned out not to be what you thought it represented? Whatever it was, you need to recognize when you do it, acknowledge it, and learn from it. And if you don’t believe that you have believed misinformation online, then you absolutely are in denial.

I also challenge you to make a commitment to be more positive online in 2024. Take time to just go through your social media and”like” the posts that are positive from friends and family – and even better, to comment on them. Go through your social media feed once a week and “like” posts from nonprofits and community programs you care about – and, even better, comment on them. Post photos to social media that you have taken yourself to social media of beautiful or fun or heart-warming things. Post about an event you have attended, or that you will attend: a farmer’s market, a yard sale, a high school band concert, whatever. Post about a class you’re taking, a book you are reading, a TV show or movie you recently enjoyed, music you love. You can still post political commentary, still post rants, but I’m challenging you to make a deliberate effort to balance that, to even OVER balance that, with something positive, something helpful or something civic-minded. Post about ANYTHING you are grateful for: your dog, your cat, the weather, a new season of your favorite show, whatever.

Here’s more about the damage of online misinformation.

If you have benefited from this blog, my other blogs, or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help

An App for Good Being Derailed by An Ugly Rumor

A woman is hidden by the target she is holding up in front of her face.

It’s the latest example of a troubling pattern regarding social media apps, especially one designed to do good: a phone-based app starts to become widely popular, especially with young people, but then becomes beset by rumors – all unfounded – that it’s a front for sex trafficking.

It happened in May 2016 to the social app Down To Lunch, in 2018 to IRL, a social app that helps users plan in-person meetups and, in 2021, to WalkSafe, an app designed to help women gauge the safety of neighborhoods. And now it’s happening to the Gas app, a tool that lets high schoolers send praise to one another.

As this article in the Washington Post points out:

Gas has never been linked to any form of human trafficking, and the app’s very structure makes it impossible, experts say. The app has limited features, doesn’t track users’ locations and can’t be used to message someone. It’s a basic polling platform that allows users to vote anonymously on preset compliments to send to mutual connections.

The false information that the app is somehow tricking children into being trafficked has ricocheted across the internet. Teenagers have posted videos on TikTok and Snapchat saying the app trafficks minors. Parents have warned other parents. On Oct. 31, the Piedmont, Oklahoma, police department issued a statement warning parents about the app and encouraging them to check their kids’ phones and the post received hundreds of shares on Facebook. The police ultimately issued a tepid retraction. The Oktaha Public School system in Oklahoma posted an announcement on its Facebook page on Thursday claiming the Gas app tricks students into giving away their locations. Local media also latched onto the hoax and shared it as the truth.

That a police department, a school district and a TV station shared such an obvious lie is outrageous. I wouldn’t be surprised if some nonprofits have as well.

How sad that this Tech4Good tool, one designed to encourage civility and positivity, is under attack by people spreading lies online.

Related resources:

Myths about sex trafficking abound in the USA.

Examples of Folklore, Rumors (or Rumours), Urban Myths & Organized Misinformation Campaigns Interfering with Development & Aid/Relief Efforts & Elections. (note there are several examples of mobs who have murdered strangers visiting their towns under the mistaken belief that such were there to abduct children for organ harvesting)

You have an obligation to be truthful online.

If you have benefited from this blog, my other blogs, or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help

When some nonprofit employees & volunteers don’t really understand what the nonprofit is trying to address & why

image that represents a panel discussion

I believe that everyone that works at a nonprofit, whether they are the Executive Director or the janitor, is seen as a communicator on behalf of that nonprofit. People are going to ask any employee or volunteer at a nonprofit a question about what that nonprofit does and why, and the person asked needs to be able to give at least a short, accurate description and then direct the person to the appropriate staff person (that person’s phone number or email) to get more info.

Too often, I see a disconnect between non-profit staff and the staff that work with clients and funders regarding what the nonprofit does and why. For instance, an IT staff member once came into my office at the United Nations program where I worked and said, “What does this UN program do? I don’t think I really understand.” And the more I talked with him, the more I realized he had NO idea not only what our program did, but what the UN really does.

I have seen and heard non-program employees and volunteers making unfortunate, even inaccurate, statements about the issues a nonprofit is trying to address – among themselves, to their family, on their own social media, to friends, to someone who they are interacting with as part of their job, etc. The consequences are REAL: they have now created misinformed members of the community, and these people will, in turn, talk to others. Maybe they won’t donate money or volunteer as a result – and will discourage others from doing so.

I would love to read any blogs or articles about how to address such a disconnect within an organization where some employees and volunteers don’t have a clear idea of what the nonprofit they work for does, why that is the mission, etc. I’d like to read blogs and articles that also have a strong argument for why ensuring all staff understand such is vital. For instance, why do frontline employees and volunteers at a thrift store that funds a nonprofit addressing poverty, job training, addiction, etc. need to understand where other funding comes from, how services are delivered, etc.? How do you get senior staff on board with making sure all staff and volunteers see that video you just shared with donors about the great work of the nonprofit, for instance?

If you know of such, please drop them in the comments.

We’ve all believed misinformation at some point

At some point, you have believed misinformation. You may bristle at the idea that you have ever fallen for a falsehood, but you have. Every person has. When you realize that you’re wrong, you probably just quietly, without any announcement, switched your stance, because it’s unlikely people around you knew that you thought something was true that wasn’t. If you cannot admit this, it’s going to be very hard for you to counter misinformation in, say, public health, because you will set yourself apart and above the majority of people.

I fell for misinformation about vaccines back in 2007, because of CNN broadcaster Larry King. I was living in Germany and I watched copious amounts of CNN International because it was one of only two-English language TV channels I had. One of the programs they showed was Larry King Live. I naively thought that people booked on his program were vetted. I assumed anyone who got on his show to talk about health, the environment, crime, whatever, had been screened, to make sure they really were appropriate to talk about those subjects, and that they had some sort of doctor or scientist they consulted to make sure someone wasn’t saying something dangerous on the show. So when Larry King hosted TV personality Jenny McCarthy and actress Holly Robinson Peete in 2007, talking about how they believed vaccines had caused their children to have autism, I believed what was being said. I didn’t say anything to anyone – at least I hope I didn’t – but the belief was there.

Then I stumbled onto the Bad Astronomy web site, a blog by scientist and skeptic Phil Plait – he probably got a shout out on fark.com and that’s how I started reading him. I started reading back issues of the blog and, low and behold, there was his thorough, merciless debunking of the myth that vaccines cause autism and his specific condemnation of Jenny McCarthy.

I will never forget reading his blog and realizing I had been duped. I literally stared at my computer screen, not moving, for at least a full minute. I was horrified. And then, I was angry.

Larry King had Jenny McCarthy on his show eight times. EIGHT TIMES. How many parents chose not to get their children vaccines because of that? How many children contracted preventable diseases because of that? How many children were permanently disabled or died because of that? It was then I realized what The New York Times later wrote in its obituary for King: “crackpot inventors, conspiracy theorists and spiritual mediums loved his show, which let them reach huge audiences without facing challenging questions.”

I wanted to link to Phil’s specific blogs that made me realize that I had been duped, but the site is pretty much defunct, and searches on the Internet Wayback Machine weren’t helpful. So, here’s a 2008 article he wrote for Discover Magazine that says much of what those blogs said, to my memory.

I share this story of being duped when I do trainings for international visitors through the State Department’s International Visitor Leadership Program through World Oregon. And there is always a look of shock and incredulity. One person asked, “Aren’t you embarrassed to share this story?” Yes, I’m ashamed that I fell for something any sensible person now knows is nonsense. But it’s important to acknowledge that being duped can happen to anyone.

Knowing when you have been duped, and acknowledging it, even just to yourself, will help you better address misinformation in your own communications efforts – professional or otherwise.

Also see:

If you have benefited from this blog or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help

Can volunteerism repair a nation?

Can volunteering repair a nation? I don’t mean dealing with infrastructure after a war or natural disaster – we know that volunteers are terrific at repairing homes, clearing roads, helping at shelters, rowing boats, etc. I mean can volunteerism be an effective tool when a nation’s people are so divided that they don’t even see reality the same way?

Maybe.

I confess that I am not one for talking about volunteering as a way to access “warm fuzzies” – for optimistic, hopeful moments of restoration of faith in all humanity. Personally, I’m a skeptic at best and a cynic at worst. But I do believe in volunteer engagement as an amazing tool: to build awareness about an issue among a group or population, to give the community a hands-on experience regarding a cause, to educate a group about the realities of a topic, to build understanding among people who may not know much about each other, or might even be hostile, and maybe, just maybe, to restore faith in institutions and other people.

A lot of politicians are talking about coming together and unity among people in the USA, but, as we all are fully aware, that’s going to take more than just talking about it. It’s also only a matter of time before some of those same people start suggesting volunteerism as a salve to heal the nation’s wounds and “unify” the people. They are picturing people of different political parties working side-by-side to clean up trash or paint over graffiti or build something.

But here is what’s going to be missing from that call-to-volunteer-and-let’s-come-together rhetoric, and what it’s going to take for volunteer engagement to lead to bridge-building among people who are oh-so-polarized:

  • Nonprofits expected to involve volunteers, especially MORE volunteers, need MONEY. Why? Because volunteers are never free. Want nonprofits to create more roles and tasks for more volunteers? Give those nonprofits cash: for staff to supervise and support volunteers, for staff training in effective volunteer engagement, and for all of the snazzy tech tools you want nonprofits to use to engage with volunteers. And that’s just to start: these nonprofits will also need training in recruiting for diversity, in conflict management, regarding effective facilitation, in inclusive volunteer engagement and communication, and more if you want them to fulfill your dreams of unity – and that requires skills they may not have, and to get those skills requires classes and consultants and that costs money.
  • Ready to fund childcare? Because if you want more people to volunteer, and you want a greater diversity of people to volunteer, someone is going to have to pay for childcare for volunteers with children.
  • Government has to bring nonprofits to the table for discussions about how to bring disparate groups of people together. If the mayor is having a council on ways to create reconciliation among a diverse city, local nonprofits need to be in the discussions. If a regional or state government body is exploring methods, nonprofits have to be there – not just the big, major nonprofits but the small grassroots groups too. And a key segment that has to be there in discussions: ARTS GROUPS: theater, dance, music, literature and fine arts.
  • We all have to stop talking about volunteering only as a way to get tasks done. We have to talk about volunteering as a way for all participants – volunteers, employees and clients – to have a transformational experience. And that means that, often, involving volunteers means tasks will not be done as efficiently and economically as possible: it’s much easier to hire one person or involve one highly-skilled volunteer to do a task than to create a way for a group of dissimilar people with a range of skills and experiences to do it at a time when everyone in that group might be available. It also means making volunteering about learning about an issue related to the mission of the organization – climate change, the reasons people are homeless, the challenges faced by under-employed people, etc. – again, not just getting work done, and not all people charged with creating volunteering tasks and roles and managing volunteers have the skillset to do that.
  • Accept that some people aren’t going to be engaged as volunteers because of a requirement at many nonprofits and community groups regarding respect and conduct of employees, consultants and volunteers, because of requirements regarding safety, and because of the potential of volunteers to spread misinformation about the focus of the nonprofit or the cause it addresses. For instance, someone who believes and promotes misinformation about child trafficking on their social media is going to be inappropriate to help at organizations related to children. Someone who does not believe in the safety of vaccines or believes the Earth is flat or refutes other science, and let’s that be known, is going to probably be inappropriate in a range of volunteering roles related to human health, marine health, outdoor geological sites, etc., especially if they will interact with other volunteers or the public. Many nonprofits have a stated commitment to creating a work culture that promotes respect and prohibits words or actions that create a hostile work environment for others. Many nonprofits have a stated commitment to equality and inclusion, and a stated refutation of racism, sexism or hate speech, and a volunteer or employee engaging in actions or language outside of their work that is in contrast to that culture could, as a result upon discovery, be dismissed. Nonprofits should not be pressured to involve volunteers who engage in misinformation that would harm the clients a nonprofit works with or that runs counter to the mission of the organization. Nonprofits should not be pressured to engage volunteers who carry weapons if that nonprofit has a policy that prevents weapons from their workspaces. And all of that means some people are going to be excluded from volunteer engagement at some organizations. Before you decide that’s somehow wrong, that everyone should have a right to volunteer anywhere they want to, note that I myself am excluded from volunteering at some organizations because I cannot adhere to their religious belief requirements, and I accept that.
  • It’s a tall order to ask organizations focused on some aspect of the environment and outdoor spaces – wildlife habitat preservation, restoring wetlands, cleaning up trash at the beach, rescue groups, etc. – to engage in additional activities to counter misinformation among volunteers regarding climate change, but that’s exactly what nonprofits need to be funded and empowered to do if we are going for “unity.” The lack of science literacy is resulting in many of the divisions in the USA, and if governments and corporations desire nonprofits to address science misinformation and lack of trust through volunteerism, they need to be prepared to fund the activities needed to train staff to make that happen, and to give staff the time to make that happen. .

So, governments and corporations: are you ready to invite nonprofits to the table, as well as to fund all that’s necessary for this monumental task of unity?

Also, see:

If you have benefited from this blog or other parts of my web site or my YouTube videos and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help

New UN Initiative seeks “Information Volunteers”

Verified is a United Nations initiative to encourage people to check the validity of news, advice and information before sharing it. Verified is looking for “Information Volunteers” to sign up to receive a daily Verified briefing and then to share the fact-based advice and information with their networks.

You’re engaging right now in the biggest project of social collaboration the world has seen. Bigger than the moon landing, than the Olympics, than the building of the tallest skyscraper or longest bridge. Billions of people are working together – the doctor on the other side of the country. The parent homeschooling their child. The scientist working on the vaccine. The nurse working around the clock. You, reading this. Working towards one common goal: to look after each other.

In this crisis, sharing trusted and verified information will help keep everyone safe, while misinformation can put lives in danger. If you want to make sure the content you’re sharing helps the world, sign up to receive Verified content, and always look out for the Verified tick.

We’re doing this for each other – for everyone on the biggest team the world has ever seen.

The initiative is available in a variety of languages:

This is in addition to the UN’s main virtual volunteering initiative, the UN’s Online Volunteering Service.

Yup, I’ve signed up!

Also see:

You have an obligation to be truthful online

How to change minds

I’m a part of the March for Science Facebook group, for people that were in the Marches for Science all across the USA on April 2017 or that supported such. A lot of the talk on the group has been about science education and public relations. There are individuals and communities all over the USA – and the world – fighting against science-based decision making in public policies and science education in schools, and many on the group feel this is because of poor wording and poor outreach by scientists and those that support science regarding public relations. In my ongoing quest to be a better communicator, I’ve watched these discussions closely.

Recently, someone posted the following regarding how we communicate about science. I think it’s a great testimony regarding what works, and what doesn’t, regarding swaying public opinion, changing people’s minds and fighting misinformation. I’m sharing it here, with her permission, but without her name to protect her identity:

I’m not a scientist. I’m not afraid of science but I also don’t have a strong grasp of most science related jargon. I joined this group along with a few other science groups/pages as I heard more and more of anti-science rhetoric from our govt. Allthough I don’t understand a lot of scientific things that doesn’t mean I don’t realize the importance of science for our society and for our future.

I have learned SO MUCH from reading posts and comments. The reason I have learned so much? The reason I am no longer “afraid” of GMO’s? The reason I have changed my mind on other popular misconceptions? Because my fear was never the science. My fear was that I didn’t know what information to trust. Money talks. It’s hard to figure out who is paying. Do I trust a science study that was paid for by a big corporation? Do I trust a study that’s published but not peer reviewed? WHO do you trust?

The common thread I’ve found as I read posts and comments in order to learn more is how stupid I am. How dumb was I to not trust GMO’s. People’s comments were blatantly MEAN. And sure, I was completely uneducated about GMO’s. I read the wrong information. I trusted the wrong sources. But again, without hours of research to find out funding sources, etc HOW do I know what to trust?

This question was amazing. I always want to learn more. I want to understand about so many things – to give my kids the best future possible. The best food to eat. The best meds for my asthmatic child. The best environment for them to grow up in, etc. But here’s the thing. If I wasn’t determined to do the best for my kids . . . by the 100th ridiculing comment on a post I found interesting I would have stopped following and learning. Heck by the 20th I would have written off these sciences pages.

Even in this thread there are those using terms like “stupid,” “brainwashing,” etc. Very derogatory terms and grouping all people who don’t have a knack for science into one realm. I have a great head for business, finances and can analyze the heck out of any non-technical literature. I don’t make fun or ridicule those people who don’t have have that ability. It accomplishes nothing.

So thank you to those of you who answered this post thoughtfully. I’m certain there are many of you who diligently try over and over again to get your point across. Don’t give up. Changing peoples’ minds is never easy but in this case it’s worth the fight.

—end quoted text—

Also see:

Folklore, Rumors & Misinformation Campaigns Interfering with Humanitarian Efforts & Government Initiatives

gossipUPDATED:

Preventing Folklore, Rumors, Urban Myths & Organized Misinformation Campaigns From Interfering with Development & Aid/Relief Efforts & Government Initiatives

Folklore, rumors and contemporary myths / legends often interfere with development aid activities and government initiatives, including public health programs – even bringing such to a grinding halt. They create ongoing misunderstandings and mistrust, prevent people from seeking help, encourage people to engage in unhealthy and even dangerous practices, and have even lead to mobs of people attacking someone or others because of something they heard from a friend of a friend of a friend. With social media like Twitter and Facebook, as well as simple text messaging among cell phones, spreading misinformation is easier than ever.

Added to the mix: fake news sites set up specifically to mislead people, as well as crowdsourced efforts by professional online provocateurs and automated troll bots pumping out thousands of comments, countering misinformation efforts has to be a priority for aid and development organizations, as well as government agencies.

Since 2004, I have been gathering and sharing both examples of this phenomena, and recommendations on preventing folklore, rumors and urban myths from interfering with development and aid/relief efforts and government initiatives. I’ve recently updated this information with new information regarding countering organized misinformation campaigns.

Anyone working in development or relief efforts, or working in government organizations, needs to be aware of the power of rumor and myth-sharing, and be prepared to prevent and to counter such. This page is an effort to help those workers:

  • cultivate trust in the community through communications, thereby creating an environment less susceptible to rumor-baiting
  • quickly identify rumors and misinformation campaigns that have the potential to derail humanitarian aid and development efforts
  • quickly respond to rumors and misinformation campaigns that could derail or are interfering with humanitarian aid and development efforts

And, FYI: I do this entirely on my own, as a volunteer, with no funding from anyone. I update the information as my free time allows.

Also see:

fake news, folklore & friendships

gossipIt wasn’t getting a journalism degree, or being a journalist, that made me a skeptic when it comes to sensational stories. It was a folklore class. Urban Folklore 371, to be exact. It was a very popular class at Western Kentucky University back in the late 1980s, both for people getting a degree in folklore studies and for people needing humanities courses for whatever their degree program was, like me. Class studies focused on contemporary, largely non-religious-based legends, customs and beliefs in the USA. One class might focus on watching a film about the games kids play on a playground and how those games explore the things they fear – marriage, childbirth, stranger danger, being ostracized by their peers, etc. Another class might review the difference versions of the “vanishing hitchhiker” story and why such stories are so popular in so many different cultures, and how the story changes over time.

I heard at least one student say, “That’s not a true story?! I always thought it was!” at least once in every class. Because of that class, I realized there were legends being told as truth all around me, by friends, by family, even by newspapers. “I heard it from my cousin” or “My friend saw it in a newspaper” or “My Mom saw it on Oprah” was usually the preface to some outlandish story told as fact. But the class taught me that, in fact, no woman was ever killed by spiders nesting in her elaborate hairdo, that there has never been a killer with a hook for a hand that attacked a couple in a parked car in a nearby town, that there is no actor who has never had a gerbil removed from his anus, and on and on and on.

I became the “um – that’s not true” girl at various places where I worked. And then via email. And I still am, now on social media. And what I have learned from being little Ms. Debunker is that people REALLY do NOT like these stories debunked. In fact, pointing out the facts that prove these stories aren’t true, no matter how gently I try to do it, often makes people very angry.

Back in the 1990s, a friend sent me yet another forwarded email. This time, the text said the email was from Microsoft Founder Bill Gates, that he’d written a program that would trace everyone to whom the email message was sent, and that he was beta testing the program. The email encouraged people to forward the message and said that if it reaches 1,000 people, everyone on the list would receive $1,000. Of course, it wasn’t true – I knew it as soon as I saw it. She’d sent me several of these type of emails – one that said people that forwarded the message would get a free trip to Disney World, another said we’d all get free computers, and on and on. I had been deleting them, but I was tired of it. So I looked online, found a site that debunked the myth, and sent her the link. I didn’t make any judgement statements; I just said, “This is a myth. Here’s more info. You might want to let everyone know you sent to, as well as the person you got it from,” or something similar.

She was not happy with me. In fact, it almost ended our friendship. She told me that the Internet was “a place for having fun” and “you can’t win if you don’t play” and what did she have to lose by forwarding the message even if it sounded fishy?

And that kind of reaction kept happening. Three new friends I made back in 2010, after I’d moved back to the USA, all unfriended me on Facebook the same day, outraged that I pointed out several things they were posting as their status updates – about how Facebook was going to start charging users, about how putting up a disclaimer on your Facebook page would stop the company from being able to sell your information, and on and on – were all urban legends, all untrue. Their reaction was almost verbatim of what that friend via email had said: Facebook is “a place for having fun” and “it’s better to be safe and share it” and what did they have to lose by sharing the message even if it sounded fishy? Also, they said they did not have time to “check every single thing online.”

Now, in 2016, I have friends that are furious with me for posting science-based web sites that debunk their posts from quack sites like the “Food Babe” claiming that GMOs cause cancer or that vaccines cause autism (to be clear, these are MYTHS). Two journalists – JOURNALISTS – were mad at me when I pointed out that a status update one had shared – it urged users to use the Facebook check-in function to say they were at Standing Rock in North Dakota, that this would somehow prevent the Morton County Sheriff’s Department there from geotargeting DAPL protesters – was promoting false information. I wasn’t just annoyed by the message – I found it imprudent, and yet another example of slackervism or slacktivism: people truly wishing to assist the protesters were checking in on Facebook rather than doing something that would REALLY make a difference, like sending funds to support the protest efforts or writing their Congressional representatives in support of the protesters. It also misdirects people from the nefarious ways law enforcement really does surveil people on social media. I would have thought journalists would know better than engage in such behavior.

Contemporary legends online cause harm, and it’s bothered me long before the Standing Rock/Facebook book check-in myth. Since 2004, I have been gathering and sharing examples of how rumors and urban / contemporary myths often interfere with relief and development activities, and government initiatives, including public health initiatives — even bringing such to a grinding halt. These myths create ongoing misunderstandings among communities and cultures, prevent people from seeking help, encourage people to engage in unhealthy and even dangerous practices, cultivate mistrust of people and institutions, and have even lead to mobs of people attacking someone or others for no reason other than something they heard from a friend of a friend of a friend. With the advent of social media like Twitter and Facebook, as well as just text messaging among cell phones, spreading misinformation is easier than ever.

Based on my experience as a researcher and a communications practitioner, and everything I’ve read – and I read a LOT on this subject – rumors that interfere with development and aid/relief efforts and government health initiatives come from:

  • misinterpretations of what a person or community is seeing, hearing or experiencing,
  • from previous community experiences or their cultural beliefs,
  • willful misrepresentation by people who, for whatever reason, want to derail a development or relief activity,
  • unintentional but inappropriate or hard-to-understand words or actions by a communicator, or
  • the desire of an individual or community to believe an alternative narrative, a desire that is stronger than the facts

That list of bullet points was central to the long list I made of recommendations on preventing folklore, rumors and urban myths from interfering with such initiatives. I made that list to help aid workers, particularly people leading public health initiatives. For years, I’ve updated that list and felt really good about it being comprehensive and realistic, and I’ve employed some of the methods myself in my work.

But are these recommendations enough anymore? I’m not sure. Because BuzzFeed reported that fake news stories about the USA Presidential election this year generated more engagement on Facebook than the top election stories from 19 major news outlets COMBINED – that included major news outlets such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, and NBC News, and on and on. And a new study from Stanford researchers evaluated students’ ability to assess information sources, and described the results as “dismaying,” “bleak” and a “threat to democracy,” as reported by NPR News. Researchers said students displayed a “stunning and dismaying consistency” in their responses, getting duped again and again. The researchers weren’t looking for high-level analysis of data but just a “reasonable bar” of, for instance, telling fake accounts from real ones, activist groups from neutral sources and ads from articles. And the students failed. Miserably. And then there’s my own experience seeing the reaction a lot of people have to references to sites like snopes.com or truthorfiction.com or hoax-slayer.com or the Pulitzer Prize-winning site Politico that debunk myths; those people claim that “These sites aren’t true. They’re biased.” And that’s that – just a simple dismissal, so they can continue to cling to falsehoods.

National Public Radio did a story a few days ago about a man in Los Angeles who decided to build fake news sites that publish outrageous, blatantly false stories that promote stories that extreme far-right groups in the USA (also known as “alt-right”) would love to believe; he thought that when these stories were picked up by white supremacist web sites and promoted as true, he and others, particularly major media outlets, would be able to point out that the stories were entirely fiction, created only as bait, and that the white supremacists were promoting such as fact. But instead, thousands of people with no formal association with white supremacists groups shared these stories as fact – reaching millions more people. He wrote one fake story for one of his fake sites on how customers in Colorado marijuana shops were using food stamps to buy pot. Again, this story is NOT TRUE. But it led to a state representative in Colorado proposing actual legislation to prevent people from using their food stamps to buy marijuana; a state legislator was creating legislation and outrage based on something that had never happened.

BTW, to see these fake news sites for yourself, just go to Google and search for snopes is biased, and you will get a long list of links to fake news sites, most right-wing, all fighting against debunking fact-based sites like Snopes. I refuse to name those fake news sites because I don’t want them to get any more traffic than they already do.

Competent decision-making depends on people – the decision-makers – having reliable, accurate facts put in a meaningful and appropriate context. Reason – the power of the mind to think, understand and form judgments by a process of logic – relies on being able to evaluate information regarding credibility and truth. But fact-based decision-making, the idea of being logical and using reason and intellect, have become things to eschew. The Modis Operandi for many is go with your gut, not with the facts. Go not for truth, but truthiness.

I always thought that last bullet in my list of why people believe myths, “the desire of an individual or community to believe an alternative narrative, a desire that is stronger than the facts,” was easy to address. Now, given all the aforementioned, I’m not at all sure.

I’m going to keep calling out myths whenever I see them, and if it costs me Facebook friends, so be it. I prefer the truth, even when the truth hurts, even when the truth causes me to have to reconsider an opinion. There is a growing lack of media literacy and science literacy in the USA – and, indeed, the world. And the consequences of this could be catastrophic – if they haven’t been already. People need to be able to not just access information, but also to analyze it and evaluate the source. That’s just not happening. And I’ve no idea how to change things.

Also see:

8:10 am Nov. 28, 2016 Update: Filippo Menczer, Professor of Computer Science and Informatics and Director of the Center for Complex Networks and Systems Research at Indiana University, Bloomington, authored the article Why Fake News Is So Incredibly Effective, published in Time and The Conversation. Excerpts: “Our lab got a personal lesson in this when our own research project became the subject of a vicious misinformation campaign in the run-up to the 2014 U.S. midterm elections. When we investigated what was happening, we found fake news stories about our research being predominantly shared by Twitter users within one partisan echo chamber, a large and homogeneous community of politically active users. These people were quick to retweet and impervious to debunking information.” Also of note: “We developed the BotOrNot tool to detect social bots. It’s not perfect, but accurate enough to uncover persuasion campaigns in the Brexit and antivax movements… our lab is building a platform called Hoaxy to track and visualize the spread of unverified claims and corresponding fact-checking on social media. That will give us real-world data, with which we can inform our simulated social networks. Then we can test possible approaches to fighting fake news.”

1:05 pm Nov. 29, 2016 Updates:

Donald Trump and the Rise of Alt-Reality Media: You think the truth took a hit last year? It’s about to get worse. A lot worse. from Politico.

For Some, Scientists Aren’t The Authority On Science from NPR

Dec. 3, 2016 Updates:

Spread of Fake News Provokes Anxiety in Italy from The New York Times

Dec. 6, 2016 Updates:

A North Carolina man read online that a pizza restaurant in northwest Washington, DC, was harboring young children as sex slaves as part of a child-abuse ring, so he drove six hours from his home to the restaurant, and not long after arriving, he fired from an assault-like AR-15 rifle. No one was injured, and he’s been arrested, but, as The New York Times notes,  “the shooting underscores the stubborn lasting power of fake news and how hard it is to stamp out. Debunking false news articles can sometimes stoke the outrage of the believers, leading fake news purveyors to feed that appetite with more misinformation. Efforts by social media companies to control the spread of these stories are limited, and shutting one online discussion thread down simply pushes the fake news creators to move to another space online. The articles were exposed as false by publications including The New York Times, The Washington Post and the fact-checking website Snopes. But the debunking did not squash the conspiracy theories about the pizzeria — instead, it led to the opposite. ‘The reason why it’s so hard to stop fake news is that the facts don’t change people’s minds,’ said Leslie Harris, a former president of the Center for Democracy & Technology, a nonprofit that promotes free speech and open internet policies.”

Dec. 9, 2016 update

“Fakes, News and the Election: A New Taxonomy for the Study of Misleading Information within the Hybrid Media System”

Giglietto, Fabio and Iannelli, Laura and Rossi, Luca and Valeriani, Augusto

November 30, 2016. Convegno AssoComPol 2016 (Urbino, 15-17 Dicembre 2016), Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2878774

Abstract:
The widely unexpected outcome of the 2016 US Presidential election prompted a broad debate on the role played by “fake-news” circulating on social media during political campaigns. Despite a relatively vast amount of existing literature on the topic, a general lack of conceptual coherence and a rapidly changing news eco-system hinder the development of effective strategies to tackle the issue. Leveraging on four strands of research in the existing scholarship, the paper introduces a radically new model aimed at describing the process through which misleading information spreads within the hybrid media system in the post-truth era. The application of the model results in four different typologies of propagations. These typologies are used to describe real cases of misleading information from the 2016 US Presidential election. The paper discusses the contribution and implication of the model in tackling the issue of misleading information on a theoretical, empirical, and practical level.

Also see: Feuds in the nonprofit/NGO/charity world

social media used to prank journalists during live event – again

“In the end, accounts of the shooting from @JewyMarie made it into reports from the AP (and The New York Times as a result), the International Business Times and an on-air interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper. There is obviously a person behind @JewyMarie’s Twitter account, but the person’s accounts of events are fake. While embarrassing, the ordeal is a reminder that a person’s word is not proof. People lie. Anonymous people on the Internet lie – a lot.”

This is from a blog by the Society of Professional Journalists. It’s an excellent caution for anyone looking for information during a breaking news event.

What a great lesson this would be as part of the class on media literacy I long to teach…