Substance and Substantiation
Media Literacy Toolkit
Welcome to Shelf Life where, when you ask, the universe answers. I’m just kidding, the universe doesn’t give a heck, but your friends do. After calling for guest writers recently, my good friend and erstwhile colleague, Amber Bennett-Groves, volunteered to write a guest Shelf Life on media literacy. I jumped on the opportunity to have Amber share her knowledge because I am the most gullible person you know and in fact I am still concerned about the Bat Boy escaping as reported in the Weekly World News circa 1992. He could be anywhere. In other words, I will believe anything I see, hear, or read in the media. I was not in my own top ten choices to write an article on this topic.
Please enjoy Amber’s excellent article on vetting media sources and understanding the techniques media frequently use to persuade and disinform audiences.
We are living at a fascinating point in history. Information has never been so readily available and it has never been easier to reach a wide audience on a public platform. The benefits to humanity from the invention of the Internet are obvious and numerous. People from all around the world are able to connect with each other, find like-minded companions, and share knowledge. The downsides are also increasingly apparent. It has never been easier to publish information, which means it has also never been easier to publish disinformation or spread propaganda. Social media brings people together and offers an opportunity for marginalized groups to create a collective voice, but it can also alienate people or cause them to detach from their communities, pushing them into ever-more radicalized and disconnected social spaces.
The (somewhat) good news is that this phenomenon is not new to the human experience. Media has been influencing the human condition for as long as we’ve existed. Ea-nasir sold some terrible copper in 1750 BCE and we’re still dragging him for it.
But changes in the speed or availability of information can have a massive influence on public opinion. One well-known previous example of publishing technology influencing a dramatic shift in society is the printing press. When Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press in the 15th century, movable type introduced a cheaper alternative to painstakingly handwritten illuminated manuscripts. Gutenberg’s printing press introduced mass production and brought affordable books and access to publishing to the general public. For the first time, leaflets and pamphlets could be cheaply printed for a wide audience, allowing widespread dissemination of religious propaganda, leading to the Reformation. (Martin Luther would have loved comment sections.)
Yesterday’s stone tablet or leaflet is today’s Yelp or TikTok, but the result is the same. Media doesn’t just record, report, and reflect our reality. It also creates our reality. To that end, it’s important to know how to recognize and verify legitimate sources of news and information.
So, in light of recent news that more than a third of all disinformation shared on Twitter/X came from just 10 “superspreader” accounts and the horrifying potential consequences from News Corp making a deal with OpenAI, here are some tips to make sure your sources are credible and avoid falling for or sharing fake news:
Check the Website
The first step to deciding if a source is credible is to check the domain name. Generally, URLs ending in .edu and .gov are more credible resources, followed by .org and then .com, but it’s important to take the entire domain name into consideration. A highly politicized or editorialized domain name ending in .edu is still likely to be a biased source of information (eg, HOMESCHOOLFREEDOM_NOBOOKS.edu is not going to be a legitimate educational resource).
Check the Headline
Editorialized headlines are a clear sign that the writer wants to influence or manipulate your viewpoint, rather than just share objective information. If the headline is in all caps or followed with multiple exclamation points, it’s a definite red flag that the information in the article is primarily attempting to provoke an emotional reaction from you, rather than inform. Likewise, editorialized headlines only belong in editorial sections in any reputable news source. A headline telling you what to feel (eg, “You’ll Be OUTRAGED When You Hear About This!!”) is an indication of tabloid journalism. Headlines are there to tell you what information the article contains, not how you should react to it.
Identify the Authority
Who created this article or message, and what are their credentials? Are they a trustworthy source of the information being reported?
For example, if you’re reading an article about a scientific or medical topic, is the author a scientist or doctor with an accredited degree in their field; a journalist with a proven track record of objective reporting who interviewed a scientist or doctor; or a random person who doesn’t work in or have an education in the field they’re writing about, claiming a vision of how to harness energy or cure cancer came to them in a dream?
Check for Copy Quality
Credible sources have been proofread and edited, generally multiple times. If the article is riddled with spelling and grammar errors, it’s a sure sign that it is not credible and you should move on.
Identify the Purpose
What message is the article trying to convey, and why? Is the main goal of the article to inform you on who, what, when, where, why, and/or how an event occurred, or to tell you what you should think and feel about it?
Recognize Who Benefits and Identify Bias
Which viewpoints and values are being presented, and which are being omitted? Is the article presenting a situation in “us vs. them” terms? Which groups benefit from you agreeing with the viewpoints presented in the article? Which groups suffer?
Search for Additional Information
If you see a post on social media that instantly provokes a strong emotional reaction, take a moment to search for verification. If it seems like it should be a major news story but you can’t find the information in the post reported on any mainstream media websites, it’s a clear indication that it’s fiction. Fact checking sites (eg, Politifact, Snopes) are also a great resource.
Recognize Propaganda
Propaganda is highly biased or misleading information, usually intended to promote a particular political or social viewpoint. Propaganda is meant to persuade you, not to inform you. It generally appeals strongly to emotions and plays on prejudices.
Common types of propaganda to keep in mind:
Astroturfing
Gives the false impression of being a local, grassroots movement by concerned citizens (eg, for a political policy or a seemingly widespread social issue), when it is actually a planned, targeted message paid for and controlled by a large group or corporation. (Get it? It’s a fake grassroots movement, hence astroturfing. I love fun names for terrible things.) Example: Sinclair Broadcast Group posing as local news.
Bandwagon
Attempts to convince you to follow a trend, buy a product, or join a cause on the basis of popularity (eg, “everyone is drinking our soda”). Frequently used in marketing and advertising. (This one is extremely common. Pretty much everyone is doing it.)
Beautiful People
Similar to Bandwagon, but attempts to convince you to follow, buy, or join not on the basis of everyone doing it—just the gorgeous, successful ones who have everything you want—and you can too if you just purchase [fill in whatever]. Example: All the hottest, smartest people subscribe to Shelf Life.
Card Stacking (Cherry Picking)
Shows one side of an argument or issue favorably, while downplaying the other side.
Glittering Generalities
Presents a compelling emotional appeal with no real argument, analysis, or concrete facts.
Plain Folks (Common Man)
Attempts to convince you that the idea or policy they’re presenting is simply common sense that every average person understands, and thus needs no further research or justification. This approach is also used to present a politician or other public figure as relatable and down-to-earth (eg, “you could have a beer with him”).
Stereotyping (Labeling, Name Calling)
Attempts to create prejudice against a group by painting them as broadly and inherently possessing negative or dangerous qualities and characteristics, to provoke an unthinking and automatic response of fear, anger, or disgust.
Testimonial
Uses statements from respected public figures, in or out of context, to give credence to an idea, policy, or product based on celebrity endorsement alone, without any supporting facts.
Transfer (Association)
Projects positive or negative characteristics on a person, group, policy, or idea, to enhance or discredit their reputation in contrast to another.
Those are the fundamental basics of media literacy. One last key point: Navigating the current media landscape is fundamentally no different than navigating social relationships. Anyone who has swindled others will likely swindle you too, if given the chance (especially Ea-nasir), and anyone who tries to convince you that everyone else is lying and they alone are a source of truth is not a trustworthy source and should be avoided. So, keep a healthy dose of skepticism in mind and pause to verify information and recognize bias and propaganda before reacting or sharing.
If you have questions that you'd like to see answered in Shelf Life, ideas for topics that you'd like to explore, or feedback on the newsletter, please feel free to contact me. I would love to hear from you.
For more information about who I am, what I do, and, most important, what my dog looks like, please visit my website.
After you have read a few posts, if you find that you're enjoying Shelf Life, please recommend it to your word-oriented friends.
 | A guest post by
|