MNHQ here: FAKE NEWS!!! and related matters

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello

We at MNHQ have been asked to take part in a discussion with the LSE's Truth, Trust and Technology (T3) Commission, so we wanted to ask for your thoughts on a few topics so that we can give an impression of what MNers reckon.

The T3 Commission says it is 'dealing with the crisis in public information' and wants to 'work with experts, practitioners and the public to identify structural causes of media misinformation and set out a new framework for strategic policy.'

The questions they've asked us to focus on are:

What media literacy skills do citizens need, given that a functioning democracy requires a well-informed public? What kinds of policy regarding media literacy would enable 'due trust' in democratic processes, and give people the tools to assess competing claims?

Is media literacy for children and young people effective and fit for purpose? What about older adults, who sometimes lack digital skills and have generally not received formal training? Is the nature of media literacy itself changing?

What responsibilities for improving information quality and the conditions of media literacy do platforms, journalists, corporations, public relations, advertising, civil society and government have?

What specifically can be done about the risk that algorithmic selection polarises opinions and beliefs?

What expectations are citizens entitled to have about how information and news is presented to them online?

We'd love to know what you all think about any or all of this - thanks in advance

MNHQ

Fake News - avoid the BBC. Job done.

Odile Try thinking before you type, dear - it'll be so much better for you.

milliemolliemou

I do think before I type.

BBC news is a load of left wing biased crap.

I'll be following this with interest. I dont think its a new problem, people tend to believe information based on how much they trust their source. Its how propaganda is successful, as well as scams.

I don't think the BBC is as unbiased as it used to be either. Sources of information are directed by the agenda of the provider. That needs to be transparent.

Teaching people not to believe mainstream media should do it.

OdileDeCaray I agree with you about the BBC but they're not biased to left wing views, they practically ran the Tory election campaign!

I'd say the BBC has a right wing bias too.

Incredibly important topic.

I think it starts at school - children need a curriculum that trains them in identifying 'fake news' and the skills necessary to spot when they are being manipulated or a source is dodgy. Chiefly History and English. English should focus rather less on identifying obscure grammatical terms or spotting literary devices in classical literature and rather more on developing multi-purpose literacy skills. History should be compulsory and all children should be taught to question bias in sources.

I don't think it's about teaching media literacy specifically - media literacy is no different as a skill to teaching literacy generally.

But that said, although that will help, it's ultimately not possible for individuals nowadays to question the media effectively because so much of what we see is limited before it even gets to us, by algorithms, targeted advertising, echo chambers. So the onus for ensuring that we are able to get a balanced view MUST lie with the media providers/platforms not the individual.

I think we need regulation of eg Facebook etc. Because they will always inherently prioritise the ones that pay ie advertisers etc over the service users who don't.

Current laws aren't fit for purpose - they're nineteenth century laws trying to regulate a twenty-first century media. They worked when all messages were public and everyone had access to the same messages. But now that we can be targeted by unknown groups/individuals, with no way of knowing who they are or what their motivation is, who however can buy data that tells them every little thing about us thanks to all the data swilling around these days, the information asymmetry is too great to make it possible for one person to spot all of this.

Critical thinking skills are crucial. There are vast demographic gaps spanning all ages (older people are highly susceptible to phone scams, younger very easy to manipulate). I think this is something which should form a bit part of PSHE within schools. (It would probably also help with radicalization too).

Big not bit

I can't believe pp claims that the BBC is left wing. That'll keep me chucking all evening 😁😁😁

chuckling

It’s not just about being able to identify fake news. When I was at school (in the 70s) we did comprehension in English lessons. That skill seems to have died out - reading a passage and being able to answer questions on what was explicit and what was implied, and also being able to extrapolate information from said passage.

It’s obvious here in the amount of people who post without having understood the OP properly.

That’s the foundation for being able to identify or even question “fake news”.

www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10235967/BBC-is-biased-toward-the-left-study-finds.html

From 2013 but if anything they have become more biased.

critical thinking,historical knowledge and English comprehension skills, together with basic science. And not describing science as 'geek stuff' as mumsnet does.

for instance - reading up on the history of Israel and th e Palesti inians would make it clear what could have happened and did not. Lear ning that beauty products cla ims are lies would stop females being sucker ed. realising that models are sick and most photos edited would stop aspirations to an unreal and ugly loo k.

being able to recog nise the usual knee jerkers and entitled rent a mob also helps.

ezcuse spaces,mn crap coding.

If both the right and the left think the BBC is biassed then perhaps they're doing something right and producing balanced news.

FWIW I blame them for the careers of both Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage.

What responsibilities for improving information quality and the conditions of media literacy do platforms, journalists, corporations, public relations, advertising, civil society and government have?

Where reporting of medical/health/lifestyle matters is concerned more should be done regarding press releases from research facilities and medical publications.
Often they are sexed up to such an extent as to be the exact opposite the actual research paper concludes and result in sensationalist headlines.
The public should be more aware that Public Health is a business like any other, and more should be done to prevent important health research from being monetised at the expense of honesty.

50shades
maybe you're right!

I suggest a reading list (at GCSE and 6th form) covering the ways in which language and the information it conveys can be manipulated and distorted. Examples: Edward de Bono's Straight and Crooked Thinking, Ben Goldacre's Bad Science and George Orwell's essays on politics and the English language. The problems are essentially not new (which is why some well targeted history lessons would be very valuable); what's new is how fast and how far communications can travel.

I'd like to see debating in schools from a very young age to encourage children to question and challenge in a non agressive way but also to be able to look at things from different angles i.e argument and counter argument.

If we all learn to question and fact check fake news would be less likely to go viral.

The BBC is by no means perfect and feels rather nepotistic but its a better option than numerous unacredited online sources.

I think all media outlets should be compelled by law to prominently display what involvement, whether financial or otherwise, their owners/backers have with any political persons or parties. Similarly any vested interests in any other media or large corporations.

I’ve talked to quite a few worried pupils over the last few weeks who saw this fake BBC news video about nuclear war with Russia on Snapchat www.independent.co.uk/news/media/bbc-forced-deny-fake-news-nuclear-war-viral-video-russia-nato-a8313896.html

While it’s good that they were talking to an adult about it, and I was able to reassure them that it wasn’t true (in the first instance because it wasn’t on the news I’d listened to that morning and subsequently because I’d read that it was fake), it’s concerning that they didn’t think to check other news sources.

I think that demonstrably fake news like this instance needs to be dealt with separately to biased news like the PP moaning about the BBC, otherwise we’ll end up with kids who don’t believe any official news outlet because ‘it’s all fake, innit’

The trouble with impartial reporting is both sides see bias.

I think this issue also ties in with the ability to critically appraise the content of any piece of writing, taking into account where it is published and understand the evidence that informs it and inherent bias. I'm thinking specifically about pseudo science and the rubbish that is published about diet, detox and what food can and can't do, but this also applies to any news story.

I also think this should start in schools and be a focus of the curriculum. Ben Goldacre's "Bad Science" should be compulsory reading for high school students.

Ben Goldacre produced lesson plans and resources for schools a few years ago. I don’t know how widely they were used.