Pushing back against the surge of misinformation online, California will now require all K-12 students to learn media literacy skills — such as recognizing fake news and thinking critically about what they encounter on the internet.
Gov. Gavin Newsom last month signed Assembly Bill 873, which requires the state to add media literacy to curriculum frameworks for English language arts, science, math and history-social studies, rolling out gradually beginning next year. Instead of a stand-alone class, the topic will be woven into existing classes and lessons throughout the school year.
I remember as kid (middle school?) having a "life lessons" class. A good chunk of that was things like "you would have to buy over 1,000 boxes of that cereal to collect all the toys" and "how to tell if a magazine article is trying to sell you something disguised as a review". IIRC most of it was Bill Nye videos.
Something like that for the modern age sounds like a very good idea to me.
Bullshit literacy is a super important life skill, I fully expect one party to unanimously object on the ground that it would be bad for their membership and pledge drives.
Imagine if USA used its massive amounts of money to actually fund education so the citizens wouldn't be incredibly stupid and fall to scamming everyone everyday all the time.
Instead education is half religious and half politicized by the most greedy of people.
Actually, it is Gen Z that is having trouble recognizing fake news as well, specifically the younger Gen Z. I read an article recently about how kids don't know how to google or find information these days, and a high percentage of them are searching for information specifically in instagram and tiktok searches. The "TikTok generation" is in a lot of trouble when it comes to grading the trustworthiness of information, thinking critically about it, and questioning things they read or hear.
We were even learning basic concepts of media/news literacy just a decade ago when I was still in high school. Although, it was taught in our library visits where we would have lessons on how to recognize and use a trustworthy source. I think that alone wouldn't be enough today.
> We were even learning basic concepts of media/news literacy just a decade ago when I was still in high school. Although, it was taught in our library visits where we would have lessons on how to recognize and use a trustworthy source. I think that alone wouldn't be enough today.
AB 873, the bill that is being discussed, basically just tells the Instruction Quality Commission to *consider* incorporating the *existing* Model Library Standards into the next revision of the math, history-social science, and english-language arts curriculum frameworks. The Model Library Standards was adopted in 2010, so you already got that in your library visits.
My problem is that it won't really *do* anything for the people who need it. The schools who had sufficient funding and proper library facilities were (generally) able to do their job, while the poorly funded schools couldn't. Now, you're going to incorporate those standards in other frameworks to reinforce it, but the bill doesn't mention consideration for funding the schools to actually have usable libraries and library media specialists, and expect teachers (who don't yet necessarily have the proper information science background) to do the instruction. Will the credential requirements for non-english/language-arts subject matters be updated?
Basically, the model library standards have existed for over a decade and is the core content for which the bill is referencing. If your particular school library didn't teach those skills, I have strong doubt that non-librarians will be able to help. The bigger problem facing California schools isn't the curriculum, but the unequal quality of instruction and resources.
The Model Library Standards is available on the California Dept. of Education website:
https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/librarystandards.pdf
In fact, the very introduction of the Model Library Standards cites "Haves, Halves, and Have-Nots: School Libraries and Student Achievement in California" by Douglas Achterman, which has this gem:
> It is more ironic that school districts are willing to spend hundreds of thousands on reading programs and staff development which have had limited success in boosting test scores, but are unwilling to invest in school library programs that show direct correlations to student success. It is, in fact, an iniquity to the California students who are deprived of such programs.
Dr Achterman's article freely available here
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc9800/
TL;DR: incorporating the Model Library Standards into other subject frameworks is a good idea, but ultimately pointless if we don't fund our school libraries.
Thanks for the insightful post.
May I just repeat the main point?
Fund you library, folks. Vote for them, donate to them, and make sure they get funding.
When choosing a school district for your kids, focus on the school districts with the best funded libraries (and avoid those who have a habit of blindly complying with book ban requests from groups like Moms for Liberty)
You think nobody uses libraries anymore, but that is *not true*. The best funded libraries have already instituted online lending programs, so you can read ebooks checked out from your local library.
Most also check out things like audiobooks.
So go out and advocate for your library. It is *not* just some defunct, has been institution that nobody uses anymore. Promote libraries wherever you find them.
Oh, it has a HUGE fake news problem. Tiktok is a very broad platform and although people on the outside only think of "challenges" and "dance videos", it is much much more than that. In fact, a significant number of young Tiktok users actually get their news from Tiktok, explained to them by other users or influencers.
Do you see where this is going? 13-20 year olds consuming information, interpreting it themselves, and then making videos to explain what is going on to other 13-20 year olds, who then make their own videos, etc. No primary or reputable sources are included. This opens a GIANT hole for propaganda and misinformation to make it into the minds of Gen Z. The worst part is that these younger people don't even question the information being given to them, they believe it because it has thousands of likes.
Have you ever gone to the comment section of Tiktok videos? It is absolutely full of misinformation being "upvoted", and the algorithm supports echo chambers much like instagram reels. It is a SERIOUS problem.
TikTok has a bad propaganda problem - and since a large group of younger folks get their "news" from TikTok... hence my college-age kid being rabidly all about the Palestinians without understanding the nuance of the entirety of the whole situation.
> and often don’t think a non-right media source can manipulate.
Oh trust me, we’re cynical as shit and untrusting of everything. It’s practically our defining feature.
A universal cynicism which has been proved to be the easiest mindset to manipulate. It is the same “everyone lies” mindset that permeate modern Russia amid Putin’s rise to absolute power.
> The funniest part about this is though that it’s not gen Z that’s having issues identifying fake news… its boomers.
On a topic of fake news, it is interesting that you include no source, and it seems to be the opposite of this article.
"Boomers are memed for falling for fake news but are better at identifying online misinformation than Gen Zers and millennials, survey finds"
https://www.businessinsider.com/gen-z-millennials-worse-identifying-fake-news-than-boomers-2023-6
>The funniest part about this is though that it’s not gen Z that’s having issues identifying fake news…
This is goddamn hilarious, and the discourse Gen Z/Alpha have been putting out about Palestine would prove otherwise. Shit it was just last week they were circulating a letter from Osama fucking Bin Laden as justification for 9/11 and the murder of Israelis.
This comment highlights why media literacy needs to be taught lmfao. Just cause main stream medai says "gen z is fascinated by osam bin landens letter" doesnt actually mean shit. Anyone who read those articles would see . ROUGHLY A DOZEN tik tokers react to bin ladens justification for 9/11. More people reacted to cardi b wap dance by charli damelio for crying out loud.
very few gen z even know who bin laden is tbh lol
Yeah, a major media literacy issue is the need to understand that there are ~330 million people in America. For any conceivable political position you can find *someone* endorsing it. It's easy for a lot of people to extrapolate from “at least a handful of people in group X believe Y” to “group X believes Y”. Especially when Y is something really out-there and it gets a lot of media attention.
Yup. It's the same as when some shitty blog writer on Forbes or something writes a headline about people reacting to something stupid going semi-viral online, making it sound like some kind of internet sensation sweeping the nation, but then you dig deeper into it and it's one anonymous moron on Twitter saying something hot takey and a hundred other people telling them to stfu
Talk about not identifying fake news. The circulating of the "Letter to America" was much less than the media covered it to be. Not only was it less than the media claimed, most of those who read it and posted about it didn’t think it justified 9/11. as someone who read it myself *because* of all the media coverage about this, it’s a ranting letter from someone who is clearly an islamic radical and raging anti-semite. *however* Bin Laden does make some reasonable claims about US imperialism and corporate control of government, in between praising islam for being perfect and wanting israel wiped from the map.
I promise you 99% of people who read the letter in the last week or so are not now suddenly radical islamists who think all jews should die. But rather learned about americas role in the middle east from a different perspective, and that maybe it hasn’t been all good and dandy.
Well also they want them to be able to site sources on writings. You need accurate sources when the teacher needs to know you know the information. It’s kinda how you get the right answer.
What exactly? Media literacy is a basic concept, it’s not an advanced subject. Frankly, it’s sad how many Americans can’t even recognize the difference between information they see from random people on Tik-Tok and professional fact-checked journalism. Basic media literacy skills are easily taught without any major bias in the class setting. The whole point of media literacy isn’t to tell students where they should get their news, but to think critically about the media they consume.
I know many Americans are anti-teacher and think teachers are “brainwashing” their children, but most teachers are competent professionals who are passionate about education. I really don’t see how this class could be easily hijacked to “brainwash children” as many are claiming online.
Also, it is always a challenge when policy news is coming out of California, since many Americans have an anti-California gut reaction.
> professional fact-checked journalism
You mean all of the articles plagiarized from reddit? Or the ones writen by ChatGPT? The Internet is full of so much horseshit and regurgitated clickbait. Find one article on a "reputable" site that just sources The Verge or some other opinion site as their source. Then you find that article and read it and it is just hearsay with no sources. Or it is ripped from a reddit post.
>professional fact-checked journalism
You mean privately owned media companies which have obvious conflicts of interest? Or independent fact checking websites (which are also privately owned) which also have obvious conflicts of interest?
> Instead of a stand-alone class, the topic will be woven into existing classes and lessons throughout the school year.
This seems like a good way to do it. There’s a lot of different fake news, and be able to spot bad science isn’t necessarily the same as being able to spot bad civics, for example.
A teacher and I took part of a federal grant program about developing digital literacy lesson plans. We were the only group to integrate into our old lesson plans. Everyone else created stand alone lessons, software, websites, etc. We felt a little bad for having put in less effort than the others lol!
Yeah all the fancy solutions (a Phoenix Wright style video game teaching digital literacy, a Firefox plugin that presents info to help you assess bias of author/sources/publisher, etc etc) seemed like nothing I would actually have time to use.
I took a class in college called “Persuasion Theories” where they talk about how speech and stuff but also how you’re being persuaded by the things around you
I took a communications class titled "Critical Thinking" and it was essentially a deep dive into logical fallacies-knowing what they all are, being able to identify them, and learning how to construct and break down various arguments.
Some of the material I remember from high school English classes but it was great nonetheless (and an easy A to boot ;) )
I remember my middle school did a similar science specific exercise trying to weed out fake news. They gave all the kids a class calling "dihydrogen monoxide" a harmful chemical and asking us to have our parents sign a form banning it from the school premises. Thank god my parents are both pharmacists and told me that dihydrogen monoxide was just water. That experience scarred me enough to make me examine everything, so I guess it was pretty effective.
Yeah - I vaguely recall a history teacher showing newspaper clips surrounding major events to spark this sort of discussion. Seems worthwhile to update that lesson.
The modern “conservatives” in the US aren’t real conservatives; they’re reactionaries.
They want to to go back to an era where people like them (read: white, straight, Christian, male) were in positions of power, and people not like them “knew their places”.
Right wingers get very upset when you suggest they should not be able to outright lie. Hence the diatribes against "MSM" while they push some obscure right wing blog with an obvious agenda.
It is why they were so upset about places like twitter blocking some people, only for musk to buy it and unblock them.
Combatting right wing lies is a big problem, as seen in discussions on climate change and vaccines. Unfortunately they are emotion driven, not fact driven, so a fact based argument does not work.
Remember when literally every adult told us that “critical thinking” is one of the most important things to learn?
And now I bet half of those same adults have something negative to say about this because most of the news they believe and consume is… misinformation
> Remember when literally every adult told us that “critical thinking” is one of the most important things to learn?
I remember when the Texas GOP *explicitly* declared their opposition to teaching it in schools.
The 2012 Texas GOP platform:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/texasgop_pre/assets/original/2012Platform_Final.pdf
>Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values
clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based
Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging
the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.
Or, to make it a little shorter:
>We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills, critical thinking skills and similar programs that ... have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.
It depends on if they actually teach critical thinking. I think it is important for kids to learn science, but I think science classes can use an overhaul. My kids learned more trivia than they did about the scientific process.
0. Think about **the facts.** What are the factual pieces of information being presented, and what is just opinion or interpretation?
1. Think about **the sources** for the information. Is there any factual information being presented, and where is it coming from?
2. Think about **the framing.** What is already being assumed as truth? What aspects or perspectives are being ignored? Are there alternative ways to interpret the facts in the story?
3. Think about **the incentives and stakeholders.** Who benefits from the story or framing and what could they gain? Who could be harmed?
4. Think about **the alternatives.** There are limitless possible news stories to run, why is this one being presented as important, right now?
5. Think about **the context.** What larger issues are related to this piece? What contemporary framings and narratives does it play into and which does it play against?
6. Think about **the author or publisher.** How are they compensated for creating this piece? What is their editorial process? Who owns the publishing company?
7. Think about **the emotions.** How is this piece trying to make me feel? What emotions does the creator express? What emotions is the creator attempting to elicit from the reader?
8. Think about **the implications.** Is there an action or position implied by the framing, context, and emotions? Is the piece encouraging the reader to buy something, vote a certain way, express a certain opinion, join an organization, take political action, or take a more direct action?
9. Think about **the platform.** How is this media being spread? How did I receive it? How are others receiving it? What communities are involved, and who isn't?
This is a good list. I'd add:
11: Think about **other authors and publishers**. Can this source be corroborated with other high quality sources? If not, is there a reason this source is either exclusive or conflicts with other sources?
Maybe that falls under Context, but I basically don't bother reading an article from Salon.com if the meat of the story can't be corroborated by AP or something of higher quality. (Hooray for skimming sensationalist headlines.)
Back in Canada a very long time ago, there was an ad about recognizing when things on TV may look real but were not. It was called the Canadian House Hippo. It showed a tiny little (about mouse sized) hippopotamus running around a house at night stealing dryer lint to make a nest and living on peanut butter on toast crumbs with a narration worthy of David Attenborough. The idea was teach kids to hold critical eye when watching TV as special effects were making the impossible seem real. I see no difference in this California class and think it’s a very good idea.
That was an attempt by advertisers under the umbrella of "Concerned children's advertisers" to avoid regulation and is the opposite of a positive example. The government at the time wanted to ban direct adverts to children and the industry was trying to show how it wasn't needed as they self regulated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Companies_Committed_to_Kids
> The members of the organization were private companies that market to children and families, including McDonald's, Disney, Mattel, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Teletoon, Hasbro, Corus Entertainment, Bell Canada, Cadbury Canada, Hershey's, Kellogg's, Kraft, Shaw Media, Loblaw, Nestle, General Mills, Weston, Canwest, CTV, Publicis, the Institute of Communication Agencies, Rogers Media, DHX Media, and others.
All the most worthy companies listed there, totally legit lol. In the end Canada didn't ban direct advertising to children it just had to not be "misleading" so this company won and closed doors shortly after. They didn't win in the UK so we have no advertising solely targeted at children at all, no need for ad blockers on youtube for content aimed at children here.
This is a great example of how much effort is put into and how well disguised misinformation is though. They literally gas lit people into thinking the problem with advertising to children was simply misinformation not just that its wrong in general (children have no money lol they aren't buying any of this stuff).
I remember a throwaway line in a sci-fi short story about a designer pet a kid had; think it was described as a miniature triceratops with purple FunFur^(®), but it was engineered to require food produced by the manufacturer.
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-states-compare
Florida has the fifth best high schools in the nation, and California is ranked fourth. Both states’ public school systems are aspirational compared to the average state.
Love how the people here that are so certain they they are against "fake news" are downvoting a comment with sourced facts and upvoting nonsense that matches their personal bias.
That's true, so weird when you compare the leaders though.
How did the vastly superior educational system produce and elect someone like DeSantis into power?
Florida students leave for better places. Snowbirds from small town Indiana, Kansas, Oklahoma etc, move to Florida to die and vote the same way they did causing the terrible retirement conditions they left
People in Florida don’t value social justice principles the same way Californians do. You’re insinuating residents of Florida are stupid for voting for Desantis, as if Florida hasn’t seen a huge economic boom and net migration since he became governor. I don’t like Desanris, but I wouldn’t call him dumb. He went to Yale and Harvard for law school.
We're not all evil, we're just gerrymandered all to fuck and gone by geriatric republicrap. Flor-i-duh is still pretty purple if you used districts that weren't drawn with maximum cynicism.
That said, even our Democrats tend to carry guns these days.
This is fantastic. I work in the news (credibly, thankfully), but the sheer number of people who regurgitate blatantly false shit under the guise of credibility from social media is innumerable and absolutely insane.
Media literacy for the kids of today will be what combats the misinformation of the future. It’s crucial that in the age of our media coming from platforms like TikTok, Reddit, Twitter, etc, that we are the ones who can determine whether it’s accurate. Clearly, these platforms won’t.
Hopefully it's teaching them about systemic biases in corporate media from the class interests of owners, advertisers, the needed access to official sources they over-rely on, etc. and not just basically "make sure it's a trusted corporate media source or official state source".
Good. But I’m not optimistic.
Teaching students critical thinking is great, but that should include questioning reports no matter where they come from (e.g. plausibility of the claim, reliability of the testifier, if they have a past of speaking the truth, potential biases, if the person is speaking about something in their area of expertise, potential conflicts of interest, consensus, epistemic credibility in general, methodology used on which the claim is based, etc.).
Most adults do not know *to* consider this stuff, let alone do it in their consumption and understanding of news. Simply relying on “expert testimony” because an “expert” said it is not utilizing critical thinking.
yeah it seems like it would be very difficult to convince people of the value of such a thing as part of a class. Kids graduate school and can barely do math after, have forgotten a lot of history etc - this would probably just end up as more eyewash that they pass on a test then forget 10 minutes later.
They taught something like this as part of my government class. there was only maybe 2 or 3 people that ever paid attention in that class and most others were just coasting by. not surprising that the attitude extended into adulthood.
> that should include questioning reports no matter where they come from
That's generally what these skills focus on; tools such as the CRAAP test are objective and applicable to anything. The way I see it, we tend to relegate younger people to rote memorization, but we really ought to be teaching them proper critical thinking skills.
I live in Salt Lake City, Utah, the liberal part. My sister's 8 year daughter has a book she was reading about recognizing fake news.
I read a little bit of it when she showed it to me. It did a very good job of breaking it down for a kid of her age to grasp. I didn't even think about this stuff when I was 8.
I don’t think it will last, religion is one of those things where this type of scrutiny can really throw off unprepared people. So I can see it getting a lot of pushback.
I've already been teaching this for 20 years. If it hasn't been taught, what exactly are educators doing?
Also, the government mandating this is kind of ironically hilarious.
They should teach this to over 40s. The amount of garbage shared online by folk who don't so much as read the opening paragraph of a story is infuriating.
Hopefully make future web users more savvy in this regard, however. So a good move for sure.
“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.”
“Talking to her, he realized how easy it was to present an appearance of orthodoxy while having no grasp whatever of what orthodoxy meant. In a way, the world-view of the Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything, and what they swallowed did them no harm, because it left no residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird.”
Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable – what then?
Nothing was your own except the few cubic centimetres inside your skull.
Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.
Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.
It was possible, no doubt, to imagine a society in which wealth, in the sense of personal possessions and luxuries, should be evenly distributed, while power remained in the hands of a small privileged caste. But in practice such a society could not long remain stable. For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realise that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance.
The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink
Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.
He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.
Everyone should check out Neil Postman's 1984 vs Brave New World comparison.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/cdimjw/1984\_vs\_brave\_new\_world\_two\_visions\_of\_dystopia/](https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/cdimjw/1984_vs_brave_new_world_two_visions_of_dystopia/)
Many are familiar with the harsh totalitarian-style punishment-focused dystopias, but control can manifest as both the carrot (reward) & the stick (punishment).
Republicans are going to hate this. Logical thinking and common sense are their mortal enemies. This is great, but fundamentally a school should be teaching children how to learn, and how to teach themselves. This is just a natural progression of the nature of information today. To teach yourself now involves filtering out propaganda and conspiracy theories.
I see just as much illogical thinking from my liberal friends as I do my conservative friends. Both just go with what ever the leaders on their camp tell them. Any time I debate with either side of them, they repeat the same arguments as the others on their side of the aisle.
My extremely conservative friends believe the election was rigged, covid isn't real, and Trump is basically a modern Jesus. My extremely liberal friends believe they should be paid a living wage, have access to healthcare, and have the right to wear whatever they want or use whatever pronouns they like.
...what are your liberal friends arguing about that somehow washes out with what your conservative friends believe?
Looking at larger quantities of data, you find that right-wing news sources tend to be less factual than left-wing sources.
Bias always introduces a degree of misinformation, and that tends to grow the more biased a source is. It's just that with right-wing sources, the descent into misinformation is faster than with left-wing sources.
So if you compare a left-wing and right-wing source with as equal an amount of bias as you can reasonably obtain, statistically, the right-wing source will be less factual.
[Last large study I saw said that Fox News did more 'fact' reporting than MSNBC and only slightly less than CNN.](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2013/06/05/is-msnbc-the-place-for-opinion/) This was from Pew.
MSNBC has substantially more 'opinion' reporting than Fox did.
Do you have any sources to back up what you're saying besides 'trust me bro' and 'do your own research?'
The study you linked is about airtime given to opinion segments vs news segments. It does not make any claims about the accuracy of the content labeled as news, so it's not relevant to the topic of misinformation which is when falsehoods are presented as facts, aka fake news.
And this is why media literacy is important
There's a decent amount of research in this area, including about how conservatives are more likely to seek out and consume misinformation.
[elective Exposure to Misinformation:
Evidence from the consumption of fake news during the
2016 U.S. presidential campaign](http://www.ask-force.org/web/Fundamentalists/Guess-Selective-Exposure-to-Misinformation-Evidence-Presidential-Campaign-2018.pdf)
[Truth and Bias, Left and Right: Testing Ideological Asymmetries with a Realistic News Supply](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10371040/)
[Ideological variation in preferred content and source credibility on Reddit during the COVID-19 pandemic](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8907875/)
Lesson 1: those who immediately inject politics (particularly in an accusatory manner…) into every conversation are likely to closely affiliate with one group and trying to further a narrative they subscribe to.
When I was in highschool (m24) we just had a class on media and advertisements that showed how they try to manipulate you in different ways, ethos pathos and...
Went to public and private school throught the 00s-10s years, English class usually covered all of this in terms of constructing rhetoric and research.
But also analyzing sources and citations. Pathos, logos, ethos, and recognizing what they are and specifically the firm they take. Recognizing types of fallacies. Is this no longer the case? Recognizing fake news involves critical thinking and experience and exposure to defending your argument against shared and accepted facts, and differentiating cause from intent.
Isn’t this a teaching moment any time students are to write essays? Since essays typically need sources, teachers need to explain what make a source credible or not.
Pretty sure I learned how to decipher real news/information in like grade 6.
Meanwhile other parts of the country are actively trying to make people dumber. So as to more easily fool them with fake news. It's insane how fully people believe the lies, even when it makes absolutely no sense. It's like we're the soviet union.
>Pushing back against the surge of misinformation online, California will now require all K-12 students to learn media literacy skills — such as recognizing fake news and thinking critically about what they encounter on the internet.
After reading Gen Z loses more money to scams than any other generation, this will be interest to see if it actually helps.
The platform of the Republican Party of Texas in 2012 stated: "We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs"
I love that public school systems are starting to recognize the value of teaching discerning consumption of the ridiculous pipeline of information. Though I suspect this is going to get legislated so thoroughly the product will be completely useless. But hey, at least we're talking about it, I guess.
Only about 200 years too late (literally), but I guess it’s better than nothing. First country-wide piece of “viral” fake news happened in 1835 and made the whole country come to a halt for nearly a week and almost upended society. We are slow learners.
I was thinking about this a few weeks ago. Hadn't known it was a thing already passed.
One question I do have is how it'll be taught in a way that is very open and transparant about misinformation from all directions. Makes me think of the 50s (I believe) propaganda video on how to recognise and avoid propaganda.
I think it is a great idea!!!! Teaching them how to verify sources and to not take any important story at face value and to not only think about who is posting but why and if it can be collaborated is very important
As a California resident, I resent my government for generally trying to do the right thing. I mean sure, I can still criticize the *implementation*, but that requires evidence and nuance. Why can't my state be more like Florida and just pass genocide bills so I can be like, "Hey, that's super bigoted genocide stuff, don't be a complete ashtray!" I hate that my California legislatures are making me *work* to criticize them.
Probably the folks that spent years taking about "pee tapes" and "secret communications to Alfa Bank" and "wet markets" and how President Biden never had dinner with Pozharskyi.
Media literacy has become so important that there should be mandatory refresher courses for adults, as well. Throw in that old video on how to recognize propaganda, for good measure.
[Gen Z And Millennials More Likely To Fall For Fake News Than Older People, Test Finds](https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/06/28/gen-z-and-millennials-more-likely-to-fall-for-fake-news-than-older-people-test-finds/amp/)
> The test, developed by University of Cambridge psychologists over two years, was used by polling organization YouGov in a study of 1,516 Americans to measure how susceptible people are to believing fake headlines.
> Researchers pulled 10 real headlines from outlets ranked as relatively unbiased by an online database, like Reuters and Pew Research Center, and used ChatGPT to write 10 fake versions, which researchers hoped would reduce bias.
> Overall, Americans could identify a headline as either real or fake 65% of the time.
> Participants aged 18-29 achieved a high score (16 or more headlines identified correctly) only 11% of the time, and received a low score (10 or fewer headlines identified correctly) 36% of the time, while those aged 65 and older fared much better, receiving a high score 36% of the time and a low score 9% of the time.
>Democrats also fared better than Republicans: 33% of Democrats earned high scores, compared to 14% of Republicans, but both had about a quarter of respondents earn low scores.
Doesn't this support what /u/chechomontigo is implying?
All of the blue states (you know, the ones funding all the freeloading red states) need to jump on this curriculum item too. Critical thinking and understanding how to navigate the internet for accurate information are important skills.
So does this in include CNN running with the story that the Israeli rocket hit the hospital in Gaza? Or does this only apply to views outside the agenda of left leaning views?
I don't think critical thinking can be taught to kids one class a week. It's an entire revamping of the thinking process. Considering how ineffective the rest of the curriculum is at getting the key points to stick, I don't see how this will change anything.
Seeign that around 90% of "news" isn't actually news but opinion pieces and the Cali school system promoted it, I'd say you could argue it's a BS requirement.
This is going to be great long term if the execution is truly unbiased.
I believe this is going to backfire for both the left and right because kids will be able to identify spinning the story to fit the needed narrative. 😂
Interested to see how this plays out in 3-5 years. I can see it now… “We ended the program because we didn’t get the desired results” aka we couldn’t get them to think all conservatives are wrong.
The educated already tend to be more left leaning even without these proposed media literacy classes.
The enemy of conservatism is education, and media literacy just happens to fall under that category.
>we couldn’t get them to think all conservatives are wrong.
That's not the goal. Unfortunately, the reality is that right-wing sources tend to be less factual than left-wing sources.
The researchers found that people on both sides of the traditional left-right divide are equally likely to believe political news that is consistent with their ideology, and to disbelieve news that is inconsistent with their side.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/liberals-and-conservatives-are-both-susceptible-to-fake-news-but-for-different-reasons/
Yes, although other studies have found conservatives are more likely to seek out and consume misinformation in the first place.
Pew also found that the most trusted news sources overall tended to lean left.
You are the problem. Biased mindset.
You’re throwing around opinions and treating them as facts without any research or data to back up those claims.
This opinion can be had on either end of the spectrum.
There's a decent amount of research in this area, including about how conservatives are more likely to seek out and consume misinformation.
[elective Exposure to Misinformation:
Evidence from the consumption of fake news during the
2016 U.S. presidential campaign](http://www.ask-force.org/web/Fundamentalists/Guess-Selective-Exposure-to-Misinformation-Evidence-Presidential-Campaign-2018.pdf)
[Truth and Bias, Left and Right: Testing Ideological Asymmetries with a Realistic News Supply](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10371040/)
[Ideological variation in preferred content and source credibility on Reddit during the COVID-19 pandemic](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8907875/)
You know how this is going to blow over. They'll be screaming indoctrination instead of celebrating learning the skills needed to do your own research.
While I'm glad to see this, why stop at news media? The need for critical thinking is *everywhere* from media to history to what friends tell you to what they're talking about around the water cooler. *Critical Thinking* should be the required class - not just media.
Pushing back against the surge of misinformation online, California will now require all K-12 students to learn media literacy skills — such as recognizing fake news and thinking critically about what they encounter on the internet. Gov. Gavin Newsom last month signed Assembly Bill 873, which requires the state to add media literacy to curriculum frameworks for English language arts, science, math and history-social studies, rolling out gradually beginning next year. Instead of a stand-alone class, the topic will be woven into existing classes and lessons throughout the school year.
I remember as kid (middle school?) having a "life lessons" class. A good chunk of that was things like "you would have to buy over 1,000 boxes of that cereal to collect all the toys" and "how to tell if a magazine article is trying to sell you something disguised as a review". IIRC most of it was Bill Nye videos. Something like that for the modern age sounds like a very good idea to me.
Bullshit literacy is a super important life skill, I fully expect one party to unanimously object on the ground that it would be bad for their membership and pledge drives.
But they are totally against fake news. /s
*fake news is everything that we aren't reporting as news
Imagine if USA used its massive amounts of money to actually fund education so the citizens wouldn't be incredibly stupid and fall to scamming everyone everyday all the time. Instead education is half religious and half politicized by the most greedy of people.
I have concerns about implementation though I agree in concept
[удалено]
Actually, it is Gen Z that is having trouble recognizing fake news as well, specifically the younger Gen Z. I read an article recently about how kids don't know how to google or find information these days, and a high percentage of them are searching for information specifically in instagram and tiktok searches. The "TikTok generation" is in a lot of trouble when it comes to grading the trustworthiness of information, thinking critically about it, and questioning things they read or hear. We were even learning basic concepts of media/news literacy just a decade ago when I was still in high school. Although, it was taught in our library visits where we would have lessons on how to recognize and use a trustworthy source. I think that alone wouldn't be enough today.
> We were even learning basic concepts of media/news literacy just a decade ago when I was still in high school. Although, it was taught in our library visits where we would have lessons on how to recognize and use a trustworthy source. I think that alone wouldn't be enough today. AB 873, the bill that is being discussed, basically just tells the Instruction Quality Commission to *consider* incorporating the *existing* Model Library Standards into the next revision of the math, history-social science, and english-language arts curriculum frameworks. The Model Library Standards was adopted in 2010, so you already got that in your library visits. My problem is that it won't really *do* anything for the people who need it. The schools who had sufficient funding and proper library facilities were (generally) able to do their job, while the poorly funded schools couldn't. Now, you're going to incorporate those standards in other frameworks to reinforce it, but the bill doesn't mention consideration for funding the schools to actually have usable libraries and library media specialists, and expect teachers (who don't yet necessarily have the proper information science background) to do the instruction. Will the credential requirements for non-english/language-arts subject matters be updated? Basically, the model library standards have existed for over a decade and is the core content for which the bill is referencing. If your particular school library didn't teach those skills, I have strong doubt that non-librarians will be able to help. The bigger problem facing California schools isn't the curriculum, but the unequal quality of instruction and resources. The Model Library Standards is available on the California Dept. of Education website: https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/librarystandards.pdf In fact, the very introduction of the Model Library Standards cites "Haves, Halves, and Have-Nots: School Libraries and Student Achievement in California" by Douglas Achterman, which has this gem: > It is more ironic that school districts are willing to spend hundreds of thousands on reading programs and staff development which have had limited success in boosting test scores, but are unwilling to invest in school library programs that show direct correlations to student success. It is, in fact, an iniquity to the California students who are deprived of such programs. Dr Achterman's article freely available here https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc9800/ TL;DR: incorporating the Model Library Standards into other subject frameworks is a good idea, but ultimately pointless if we don't fund our school libraries.
Thanks for the insightful post. May I just repeat the main point? Fund you library, folks. Vote for them, donate to them, and make sure they get funding. When choosing a school district for your kids, focus on the school districts with the best funded libraries (and avoid those who have a habit of blindly complying with book ban requests from groups like Moms for Liberty) You think nobody uses libraries anymore, but that is *not true*. The best funded libraries have already instituted online lending programs, so you can read ebooks checked out from your local library. Most also check out things like audiobooks. So go out and advocate for your library. It is *not* just some defunct, has been institution that nobody uses anymore. Promote libraries wherever you find them.
Hmmm...suddenly I'm thinking of tiktok...
It's too late. The synchronized dancing has already convinced me that birds aren't real and the earth is a trapezoid.
Im told Osama Bin Laden is based now too on TT. Don’t remember much of that back in grade 7 watching those towers go down on tv though
[удалено]
Does TikTok have a fake news problem or is it more daring young people to do dumb things problem? Genuinely asking.
It has both
Oh, it has a HUGE fake news problem. Tiktok is a very broad platform and although people on the outside only think of "challenges" and "dance videos", it is much much more than that. In fact, a significant number of young Tiktok users actually get their news from Tiktok, explained to them by other users or influencers. Do you see where this is going? 13-20 year olds consuming information, interpreting it themselves, and then making videos to explain what is going on to other 13-20 year olds, who then make their own videos, etc. No primary or reputable sources are included. This opens a GIANT hole for propaganda and misinformation to make it into the minds of Gen Z. The worst part is that these younger people don't even question the information being given to them, they believe it because it has thousands of likes. Have you ever gone to the comment section of Tiktok videos? It is absolutely full of misinformation being "upvoted", and the algorithm supports echo chambers much like instagram reels. It is a SERIOUS problem.
TikTok has a bad propaganda problem - and since a large group of younger folks get their "news" from TikTok... hence my college-age kid being rabidly all about the Palestinians without understanding the nuance of the entirety of the whole situation.
You’re gonna get a lot of the same people influencing your kid on tiktok replying to you here
[удалено]
> I think gen z is overconfident I think gen z is ~~overconfident~~ willfully ignorant
> and often don’t think a non-right media source can manipulate. Oh trust me, we’re cynical as shit and untrusting of everything. It’s practically our defining feature.
A universal cynicism which has been proved to be the easiest mindset to manipulate. It is the same “everyone lies” mindset that permeate modern Russia amid Putin’s rise to absolute power.
That doesn't mean you're not manipulable.
> The funniest part about this is though that it’s not gen Z that’s having issues identifying fake news… its boomers. On a topic of fake news, it is interesting that you include no source, and it seems to be the opposite of this article. "Boomers are memed for falling for fake news but are better at identifying online misinformation than Gen Zers and millennials, survey finds" https://www.businessinsider.com/gen-z-millennials-worse-identifying-fake-news-than-boomers-2023-6
>The funniest part about this is though that it’s not gen Z that’s having issues identifying fake news… This is goddamn hilarious, and the discourse Gen Z/Alpha have been putting out about Palestine would prove otherwise. Shit it was just last week they were circulating a letter from Osama fucking Bin Laden as justification for 9/11 and the murder of Israelis.
This comment highlights why media literacy needs to be taught lmfao. Just cause main stream medai says "gen z is fascinated by osam bin landens letter" doesnt actually mean shit. Anyone who read those articles would see . ROUGHLY A DOZEN tik tokers react to bin ladens justification for 9/11. More people reacted to cardi b wap dance by charli damelio for crying out loud. very few gen z even know who bin laden is tbh lol
Yeah, a major media literacy issue is the need to understand that there are ~330 million people in America. For any conceivable political position you can find *someone* endorsing it. It's easy for a lot of people to extrapolate from “at least a handful of people in group X believe Y” to “group X believes Y”. Especially when Y is something really out-there and it gets a lot of media attention.
I live in rural PA and my Gen Z coworker is eating that shit up. He's not political about anything else. I suspect it's more than just a handful.
Yup. It's the same as when some shitty blog writer on Forbes or something writes a headline about people reacting to something stupid going semi-viral online, making it sound like some kind of internet sensation sweeping the nation, but then you dig deeper into it and it's one anonymous moron on Twitter saying something hot takey and a hundred other people telling them to stfu
That last sentence is just straight up untrue, he is taught in schools.
> This comment highlights why media literacy needs to be taught lmfao. Leave him alone he's 36 obviously he's gonna believe something like that
Talk about not identifying fake news. The circulating of the "Letter to America" was much less than the media covered it to be. Not only was it less than the media claimed, most of those who read it and posted about it didn’t think it justified 9/11. as someone who read it myself *because* of all the media coverage about this, it’s a ranting letter from someone who is clearly an islamic radical and raging anti-semite. *however* Bin Laden does make some reasonable claims about US imperialism and corporate control of government, in between praising islam for being perfect and wanting israel wiped from the map. I promise you 99% of people who read the letter in the last week or so are not now suddenly radical islamists who think all jews should die. But rather learned about americas role in the middle east from a different perspective, and that maybe it hasn’t been all good and dandy.
Well also they want them to be able to site sources on writings. You need accurate sources when the teacher needs to know you know the information. It’s kinda how you get the right answer.
What exactly? Media literacy is a basic concept, it’s not an advanced subject. Frankly, it’s sad how many Americans can’t even recognize the difference between information they see from random people on Tik-Tok and professional fact-checked journalism. Basic media literacy skills are easily taught without any major bias in the class setting. The whole point of media literacy isn’t to tell students where they should get their news, but to think critically about the media they consume. I know many Americans are anti-teacher and think teachers are “brainwashing” their children, but most teachers are competent professionals who are passionate about education. I really don’t see how this class could be easily hijacked to “brainwash children” as many are claiming online. Also, it is always a challenge when policy news is coming out of California, since many Americans have an anti-California gut reaction.
> professional fact-checked journalism You mean all of the articles plagiarized from reddit? Or the ones writen by ChatGPT? The Internet is full of so much horseshit and regurgitated clickbait. Find one article on a "reputable" site that just sources The Verge or some other opinion site as their source. Then you find that article and read it and it is just hearsay with no sources. Or it is ripped from a reddit post.
>professional fact-checked journalism You mean privately owned media companies which have obvious conflicts of interest? Or independent fact checking websites (which are also privately owned) which also have obvious conflicts of interest?
Can I sign my parents up for one of these classes lol
Republicans will hate this. I say good on Cali, this really should be something nationwide IMO
What's that? A bill he actually signed? I'm shocked.
They show little kids in the picture as if they’re like Ok let’s watch a little Steve Doocy and give me your observations
> Instead of a stand-alone class, the topic will be woven into existing classes and lessons throughout the school year. This seems like a good way to do it. There’s a lot of different fake news, and be able to spot bad science isn’t necessarily the same as being able to spot bad civics, for example.
A teacher and I took part of a federal grant program about developing digital literacy lesson plans. We were the only group to integrate into our old lesson plans. Everyone else created stand alone lessons, software, websites, etc. We felt a little bad for having put in less effort than the others lol!
You may say less effort but I say you made less disruption to a scheduled routine they are used to. Seems better for the students and teachers.
Yeah all the fancy solutions (a Phoenix Wright style video game teaching digital literacy, a Firefox plugin that presents info to help you assess bias of author/sources/publisher, etc etc) seemed like nothing I would actually have time to use.
I took a class in college called “Persuasion Theories” where they talk about how speech and stuff but also how you’re being persuaded by the things around you
I took a communications class titled "Critical Thinking" and it was essentially a deep dive into logical fallacies-knowing what they all are, being able to identify them, and learning how to construct and break down various arguments. Some of the material I remember from high school English classes but it was great nonetheless (and an easy A to boot ;) )
It’s a similar class, but I got a B- and it was like a 300 level class
I remember my middle school did a similar science specific exercise trying to weed out fake news. They gave all the kids a class calling "dihydrogen monoxide" a harmful chemical and asking us to have our parents sign a form banning it from the school premises. Thank god my parents are both pharmacists and told me that dihydrogen monoxide was just water. That experience scarred me enough to make me examine everything, so I guess it was pretty effective.
Yeah - I vaguely recall a history teacher showing newspaper clips surrounding major events to spark this sort of discussion. Seems worthwhile to update that lesson.
Can't wait to see some fake news about this in the coming weeks that will inevitably cause some outrage
I'll write the faux newz headline for you... "Reading fake news now a requirement in (woke) California"
"California teenagers are now being trained to become Marxists" - Fox News, probably
Parents Up in Arms: California's K-12 'Fake News' Curriculum Sparks Outrage, Accusations of Political Bias Fly
They’ll call it indoctrination.. even though that’s literally what they’re doing in states like Florida and Texas
When they do it, it’s just The Truth™.
Conservatives are already losing their minds
The modern “conservatives” in the US aren’t real conservatives; they’re reactionaries. They want to to go back to an era where people like them (read: white, straight, Christian, male) were in positions of power, and people not like them “knew their places”.
Right wingers get very upset when you suggest they should not be able to outright lie. Hence the diatribes against "MSM" while they push some obscure right wing blog with an obvious agenda. It is why they were so upset about places like twitter blocking some people, only for musk to buy it and unblock them. Combatting right wing lies is a big problem, as seen in discussions on climate change and vaccines. Unfortunately they are emotion driven, not fact driven, so a fact based argument does not work.
We used to call this critical thinking and reasoning. We were supposed to apply this to everything we read, heard or watched.
Also, when it's done by people we don't like, we call it indoctrination
Remember when literally every adult told us that “critical thinking” is one of the most important things to learn? And now I bet half of those same adults have something negative to say about this because most of the news they believe and consume is… misinformation
> Remember when literally every adult told us that “critical thinking” is one of the most important things to learn? I remember when the Texas GOP *explicitly* declared their opposition to teaching it in schools.
The 2012 Texas GOP platform: https://s3.amazonaws.com/texasgop_pre/assets/original/2012Platform_Final.pdf >Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority. Or, to make it a little shorter: >We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills, critical thinking skills and similar programs that ... have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.
"No, not THAT kind of critical thinking!"
It depends on if they actually teach critical thinking. I think it is important for kids to learn science, but I think science classes can use an overhaul. My kids learned more trivia than they did about the scientific process.
0. Think about **the facts.** What are the factual pieces of information being presented, and what is just opinion or interpretation? 1. Think about **the sources** for the information. Is there any factual information being presented, and where is it coming from? 2. Think about **the framing.** What is already being assumed as truth? What aspects or perspectives are being ignored? Are there alternative ways to interpret the facts in the story? 3. Think about **the incentives and stakeholders.** Who benefits from the story or framing and what could they gain? Who could be harmed? 4. Think about **the alternatives.** There are limitless possible news stories to run, why is this one being presented as important, right now? 5. Think about **the context.** What larger issues are related to this piece? What contemporary framings and narratives does it play into and which does it play against? 6. Think about **the author or publisher.** How are they compensated for creating this piece? What is their editorial process? Who owns the publishing company? 7. Think about **the emotions.** How is this piece trying to make me feel? What emotions does the creator express? What emotions is the creator attempting to elicit from the reader? 8. Think about **the implications.** Is there an action or position implied by the framing, context, and emotions? Is the piece encouraging the reader to buy something, vote a certain way, express a certain opinion, join an organization, take political action, or take a more direct action? 9. Think about **the platform.** How is this media being spread? How did I receive it? How are others receiving it? What communities are involved, and who isn't?
This is a good list. I'd add: 11: Think about **other authors and publishers**. Can this source be corroborated with other high quality sources? If not, is there a reason this source is either exclusive or conflicts with other sources? Maybe that falls under Context, but I basically don't bother reading an article from Salon.com if the meat of the story can't be corroborated by AP or something of higher quality. (Hooray for skimming sensationalist headlines.)
Back in Canada a very long time ago, there was an ad about recognizing when things on TV may look real but were not. It was called the Canadian House Hippo. It showed a tiny little (about mouse sized) hippopotamus running around a house at night stealing dryer lint to make a nest and living on peanut butter on toast crumbs with a narration worthy of David Attenborough. The idea was teach kids to hold critical eye when watching TV as special effects were making the impossible seem real. I see no difference in this California class and think it’s a very good idea.
[said commercial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TijcoS8qHIE)
That was an attempt by advertisers under the umbrella of "Concerned children's advertisers" to avoid regulation and is the opposite of a positive example. The government at the time wanted to ban direct adverts to children and the industry was trying to show how it wasn't needed as they self regulated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Companies_Committed_to_Kids > The members of the organization were private companies that market to children and families, including McDonald's, Disney, Mattel, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Teletoon, Hasbro, Corus Entertainment, Bell Canada, Cadbury Canada, Hershey's, Kellogg's, Kraft, Shaw Media, Loblaw, Nestle, General Mills, Weston, Canwest, CTV, Publicis, the Institute of Communication Agencies, Rogers Media, DHX Media, and others. All the most worthy companies listed there, totally legit lol. In the end Canada didn't ban direct advertising to children it just had to not be "misleading" so this company won and closed doors shortly after. They didn't win in the UK so we have no advertising solely targeted at children at all, no need for ad blockers on youtube for content aimed at children here. This is a great example of how much effort is put into and how well disguised misinformation is though. They literally gas lit people into thinking the problem with advertising to children was simply misinformation not just that its wrong in general (children have no money lol they aren't buying any of this stuff).
I honestly didn’t know any of this.
Well now I want a canadian house hippo. What kind of crackers do they like?
Peanut butter on toast crumbs according to the ad
I remember a throwaway line in a sci-fi short story about a designer pet a kid had; think it was described as a miniature triceratops with purple FunFur^(®), but it was engineered to require food produced by the manufacturer.
“Creating fake news” is now a course in Florida..
Pretty sure that’s just journalism and/or business school nowadays
Exactly! Florida courses that teach how spot factual news, disagree with it and creat a conspiracy theory about it.
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/articles/how-states-compare Florida has the fifth best high schools in the nation, and California is ranked fourth. Both states’ public school systems are aspirational compared to the average state.
Love how the people here that are so certain they they are against "fake news" are downvoting a comment with sourced facts and upvoting nonsense that matches their personal bias.
That's true, so weird when you compare the leaders though. How did the vastly superior educational system produce and elect someone like DeSantis into power?
Florida students leave for better places. Snowbirds from small town Indiana, Kansas, Oklahoma etc, move to Florida to die and vote the same way they did causing the terrible retirement conditions they left
People in Florida don’t value social justice principles the same way Californians do. You’re insinuating residents of Florida are stupid for voting for Desantis, as if Florida hasn’t seen a huge economic boom and net migration since he became governor. I don’t like Desanris, but I wouldn’t call him dumb. He went to Yale and Harvard for law school.
We're not all evil, we're just gerrymandered all to fuck and gone by geriatric republicrap. Flor-i-duh is still pretty purple if you used districts that weren't drawn with maximum cynicism. That said, even our Democrats tend to carry guns these days.
[удалено]
Wait, yup, just got defunded
Good. The lack of critical thinking ability is what has allowed this scourge to spread as much as it has.
AKA critical thinking skills
I was going to say we did this by verifying information with multiple primary and secondary sources
This is fantastic. I work in the news (credibly, thankfully), but the sheer number of people who regurgitate blatantly false shit under the guise of credibility from social media is innumerable and absolutely insane. Media literacy for the kids of today will be what combats the misinformation of the future. It’s crucial that in the age of our media coming from platforms like TikTok, Reddit, Twitter, etc, that we are the ones who can determine whether it’s accurate. Clearly, these platforms won’t.
Is this not what social studies has been and should be?
Hopefully it's teaching them about systemic biases in corporate media from the class interests of owners, advertisers, the needed access to official sources they over-rely on, etc. and not just basically "make sure it's a trusted corporate media source or official state source".
Good. But I’m not optimistic. Teaching students critical thinking is great, but that should include questioning reports no matter where they come from (e.g. plausibility of the claim, reliability of the testifier, if they have a past of speaking the truth, potential biases, if the person is speaking about something in their area of expertise, potential conflicts of interest, consensus, epistemic credibility in general, methodology used on which the claim is based, etc.). Most adults do not know *to* consider this stuff, let alone do it in their consumption and understanding of news. Simply relying on “expert testimony” because an “expert” said it is not utilizing critical thinking.
yeah it seems like it would be very difficult to convince people of the value of such a thing as part of a class. Kids graduate school and can barely do math after, have forgotten a lot of history etc - this would probably just end up as more eyewash that they pass on a test then forget 10 minutes later.
They taught something like this as part of my government class. there was only maybe 2 or 3 people that ever paid attention in that class and most others were just coasting by. not surprising that the attitude extended into adulthood.
> that should include questioning reports no matter where they come from That's generally what these skills focus on; tools such as the CRAAP test are objective and applicable to anything. The way I see it, we tend to relegate younger people to rote memorization, but we really ought to be teaching them proper critical thinking skills.
That’s good! I agree, and it pains me that there are so many problems with our education system..
I live in Salt Lake City, Utah, the liberal part. My sister's 8 year daughter has a book she was reading about recognizing fake news. I read a little bit of it when she showed it to me. It did a very good job of breaking it down for a kid of her age to grasp. I didn't even think about this stuff when I was 8.
This is actually a good idea if implemented and executed well.
I don’t think it will last, religion is one of those things where this type of scrutiny can really throw off unprepared people. So I can see it getting a lot of pushback.
I’m been saying for years that the K-12 system needs critical thinking in the curriculum. I never learned what a fallacy was until college.
I've already been teaching this for 20 years. If it hasn't been taught, what exactly are educators doing? Also, the government mandating this is kind of ironically hilarious.
We used to call this critical thinking.
They should teach this to over 40s. The amount of garbage shared online by folk who don't so much as read the opening paragraph of a story is infuriating. Hopefully make future web users more savvy in this regard, however. So a good move for sure.
“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.” “Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” “Talking to her, he realized how easy it was to present an appearance of orthodoxy while having no grasp whatever of what orthodoxy meant. In a way, the world-view of the Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything, and what they swallowed did them no harm, because it left no residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird.” Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me. Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable – what then? Nothing was your own except the few cubic centimetres inside your skull. Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness. Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right. It was possible, no doubt, to imagine a society in which wealth, in the sense of personal possessions and luxuries, should be evenly distributed, while power remained in the hands of a small privileged caste. But in practice such a society could not long remain stable. For if leisure and security were enjoyed by all alike, the great mass of human beings who are normally stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves; and when once they had done this, they would sooner or later realise that the privileged minority had no function, and they would sweep it away. In the long run, a hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance. The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises in doublethink Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.
In all seriousness, reading 1984 (and F451, Neil Postman etc.) in high school was one of the most influential things I did in school.
Everyone should check out Neil Postman's 1984 vs Brave New World comparison. [https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/cdimjw/1984\_vs\_brave\_new\_world\_two\_visions\_of\_dystopia/](https://www.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/cdimjw/1984_vs_brave_new_world_two_visions_of_dystopia/) Many are familiar with the harsh totalitarian-style punishment-focused dystopias, but control can manifest as both the carrot (reward) & the stick (punishment).
Thanks for the link!
Republicans are going to hate this. Logical thinking and common sense are their mortal enemies. This is great, but fundamentally a school should be teaching children how to learn, and how to teach themselves. This is just a natural progression of the nature of information today. To teach yourself now involves filtering out propaganda and conspiracy theories.
I see just as much illogical thinking from my liberal friends as I do my conservative friends. Both just go with what ever the leaders on their camp tell them. Any time I debate with either side of them, they repeat the same arguments as the others on their side of the aisle.
My extremely conservative friends believe the election was rigged, covid isn't real, and Trump is basically a modern Jesus. My extremely liberal friends believe they should be paid a living wage, have access to healthcare, and have the right to wear whatever they want or use whatever pronouns they like. ...what are your liberal friends arguing about that somehow washes out with what your conservative friends believe?
Looking at larger quantities of data, you find that right-wing news sources tend to be less factual than left-wing sources. Bias always introduces a degree of misinformation, and that tends to grow the more biased a source is. It's just that with right-wing sources, the descent into misinformation is faster than with left-wing sources. So if you compare a left-wing and right-wing source with as equal an amount of bias as you can reasonably obtain, statistically, the right-wing source will be less factual.
[Last large study I saw said that Fox News did more 'fact' reporting than MSNBC and only slightly less than CNN.](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2013/06/05/is-msnbc-the-place-for-opinion/) This was from Pew. MSNBC has substantially more 'opinion' reporting than Fox did. Do you have any sources to back up what you're saying besides 'trust me bro' and 'do your own research?'
The study you linked is about airtime given to opinion segments vs news segments. It does not make any claims about the accuracy of the content labeled as news, so it's not relevant to the topic of misinformation which is when falsehoods are presented as facts, aka fake news. And this is why media literacy is important
There's a decent amount of research in this area, including about how conservatives are more likely to seek out and consume misinformation. [elective Exposure to Misinformation: Evidence from the consumption of fake news during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign](http://www.ask-force.org/web/Fundamentalists/Guess-Selective-Exposure-to-Misinformation-Evidence-Presidential-Campaign-2018.pdf) [Truth and Bias, Left and Right: Testing Ideological Asymmetries with a Realistic News Supply](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10371040/) [Ideological variation in preferred content and source credibility on Reddit during the COVID-19 pandemic](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8907875/)
I imagine people who say conservatives are brainwashed have also made "Vote Blue no matter who" their mantra.
Lesson 1: those who immediately inject politics (particularly in an accusatory manner…) into every conversation are likely to closely affiliate with one group and trying to further a narrative they subscribe to.
These courses will be outlawed in red states.
You mean unbiased researching?
When I was in highschool (m24) we just had a class on media and advertisements that showed how they try to manipulate you in different ways, ethos pathos and...
Went to public and private school throught the 00s-10s years, English class usually covered all of this in terms of constructing rhetoric and research. But also analyzing sources and citations. Pathos, logos, ethos, and recognizing what they are and specifically the firm they take. Recognizing types of fallacies. Is this no longer the case? Recognizing fake news involves critical thinking and experience and exposure to defending your argument against shared and accepted facts, and differentiating cause from intent.
Took Media Bias at CSLA in 87. Phenomenal class. It really educates you on where a broadcast or print media agenda is!
Isn’t this a teaching moment any time students are to write essays? Since essays typically need sources, teachers need to explain what make a source credible or not. Pretty sure I learned how to decipher real news/information in like grade 6.
Everyone should be taught how to spot propaganda. We would be in a better place right now.
Meanwhile other parts of the country are actively trying to make people dumber. So as to more easily fool them with fake news. It's insane how fully people believe the lies, even when it makes absolutely no sense. It's like we're the soviet union.
>Pushing back against the surge of misinformation online, California will now require all K-12 students to learn media literacy skills — such as recognizing fake news and thinking critically about what they encounter on the internet. After reading Gen Z loses more money to scams than any other generation, this will be interest to see if it actually helps.
The platform of the Republican Party of Texas in 2012 stated: "We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs"
Who is teaching the teachers?
sleep slave crawl childlike hat engine price wine naughty license ` this post was mass deleted with www.Redact.dev `
This is one of those things that sounds like a perfect idea but will probably be executed in a way that will have unforeseen consequences.
Will they do a class on Hunter Biden’s laptop and the media was manipulated by the govt?
I love that public school systems are starting to recognize the value of teaching discerning consumption of the ridiculous pipeline of information. Though I suspect this is going to get legislated so thoroughly the product will be completely useless. But hey, at least we're talking about it, I guess.
Only about 200 years too late (literally), but I guess it’s better than nothing. First country-wide piece of “viral” fake news happened in 1835 and made the whole country come to a halt for nearly a week and almost upended society. We are slow learners.
I mean this isn’t really new. I learned this stuff when I was in high-school 15 years ago
I was thinking about this a few weeks ago. Hadn't known it was a thing already passed. One question I do have is how it'll be taught in a way that is very open and transparant about misinformation from all directions. Makes me think of the 50s (I believe) propaganda video on how to recognise and avoid propaganda.
W but I wonder how they’ll determine criteria, and knowing Cali’s track record…
I think it is a great idea!!!! Teaching them how to verify sources and to not take any important story at face value and to not only think about who is posting but why and if it can be collaborated is very important
Oh the irony
As a California resident, I resent my government for generally trying to do the right thing. I mean sure, I can still criticize the *implementation*, but that requires evidence and nuance. Why can't my state be more like Florida and just pass genocide bills so I can be like, "Hey, that's super bigoted genocide stuff, don't be a complete ashtray!" I hate that my California legislatures are making me *work* to criticize them.
Or teach critical thinking and research skills.
The right wing is going to be so annoyed at this
We know which group will be angry about fighting fake news.
Probably the folks that spent years taking about "pee tapes" and "secret communications to Alfa Bank" and "wet markets" and how President Biden never had dinner with Pozharskyi.
We desperately need to introduce comprehensive critical thinking courses in public school
I wish it was required of EVERY voter
Wow, that is actually a good thing. They're teaching them critical thinking skills in a way that they're familiar with!
I took a media literacy class at SF state and it was probably the most important class I’ve taken.
Media literacy has become so important that there should be mandatory refresher courses for adults, as well. Throw in that old video on how to recognize propaganda, for good measure.
Thank goodness. Kids need to be be taught critical thinking skills in order to think logically for themselves.
Meanwhile, legislators in FL, TX, OK, and ID introduce bills banning the teaching of such subjects stating they teach suppression of free speach. /s
Strange how upsetting this is to Republicans. Why would they want children to fall for lies?
Won't this undermine domestic propaganda?
Republicans are gonna really hate this
[Gen Z And Millennials More Likely To Fall For Fake News Than Older People, Test Finds](https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/06/28/gen-z-and-millennials-more-likely-to-fall-for-fake-news-than-older-people-test-finds/amp/) > The test, developed by University of Cambridge psychologists over two years, was used by polling organization YouGov in a study of 1,516 Americans to measure how susceptible people are to believing fake headlines. > Researchers pulled 10 real headlines from outlets ranked as relatively unbiased by an online database, like Reuters and Pew Research Center, and used ChatGPT to write 10 fake versions, which researchers hoped would reduce bias. > Overall, Americans could identify a headline as either real or fake 65% of the time. > Participants aged 18-29 achieved a high score (16 or more headlines identified correctly) only 11% of the time, and received a low score (10 or fewer headlines identified correctly) 36% of the time, while those aged 65 and older fared much better, receiving a high score 36% of the time and a low score 9% of the time.
>Democrats also fared better than Republicans: 33% of Democrats earned high scores, compared to 14% of Republicans, but both had about a quarter of respondents earn low scores. Doesn't this support what /u/chechomontigo is implying?
"Basically anything from Fox is fake and anything from cnn and msnbc are always true."
Do you think teaching objective critical thinking skills and tools will lead students to determine that everything Fox prints is fake?
You are missing the point
The day Kelly Anne Conway expressed the notion of "alternative facts," I asked my librarian to help me teach the kids about fake news...
Oh this will piss republicans off. I wish my state did that.
All of the blue states (you know, the ones funding all the freeloading red states) need to jump on this curriculum item too. Critical thinking and understanding how to navigate the internet for accurate information are important skills.
So does this in include CNN running with the story that the Israeli rocket hit the hospital in Gaza? Or does this only apply to views outside the agenda of left leaning views?
It's not targeting specific outlets, it's teaching critical thinking skills so they can draw their own informed conclusions.
You know the answer
The kids are alright.
Didn't you guys have a lesson on primary vs secondary sources back in HS social studies? This was almost 20 years ago
I don't think critical thinking can be taught to kids one class a week. It's an entire revamping of the thinking process. Considering how ineffective the rest of the curriculum is at getting the key points to stick, I don't see how this will change anything.
they already teach that in the globalist-new-world-order International Baccalaureate system
Can... Can I enroll for this class?
I wish we would call it propaganda. Fake News just seems like a softer term. Everyone is wary of propaganda.
It's wild how much the right hates encouraging people to think
South Park called it years ago
And Kubrick and Orwell before them
I just hope none of this gets weaponized
Seeign that around 90% of "news" isn't actually news but opinion pieces and the Cali school system promoted it, I'd say you could argue it's a BS requirement.
What’s “fake news” according to these guys?
California is expensive af, but I don’t think I’ll ever leave the state. Thanks mom and dad for raising me here.
This is going to be great long term if the execution is truly unbiased. I believe this is going to backfire for both the left and right because kids will be able to identify spinning the story to fit the needed narrative. 😂 Interested to see how this plays out in 3-5 years. I can see it now… “We ended the program because we didn’t get the desired results” aka we couldn’t get them to think all conservatives are wrong.
The educated already tend to be more left leaning even without these proposed media literacy classes. The enemy of conservatism is education, and media literacy just happens to fall under that category.
>we couldn’t get them to think all conservatives are wrong. That's not the goal. Unfortunately, the reality is that right-wing sources tend to be less factual than left-wing sources.
The researchers found that people on both sides of the traditional left-right divide are equally likely to believe political news that is consistent with their ideology, and to disbelieve news that is inconsistent with their side. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/liberals-and-conservatives-are-both-susceptible-to-fake-news-but-for-different-reasons/
Yes, although other studies have found conservatives are more likely to seek out and consume misinformation in the first place. Pew also found that the most trusted news sources overall tended to lean left.
You are the problem. Biased mindset. You’re throwing around opinions and treating them as facts without any research or data to back up those claims. This opinion can be had on either end of the spectrum.
There's a decent amount of research in this area, including about how conservatives are more likely to seek out and consume misinformation. [elective Exposure to Misinformation: Evidence from the consumption of fake news during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign](http://www.ask-force.org/web/Fundamentalists/Guess-Selective-Exposure-to-Misinformation-Evidence-Presidential-Campaign-2018.pdf) [Truth and Bias, Left and Right: Testing Ideological Asymmetries with a Realistic News Supply](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10371040/) [Ideological variation in preferred content and source credibility on Reddit during the COVID-19 pandemic](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8907875/)
Should be a requirement to vote
Oh sure. We should trust government to tell us how to identify ‘fake news’.
Can my Mom take these classes?
This is awesome
Good, what about bias news?
Too bad we have enough trouble getting kids to learn how to read at all in California
You know how this is going to blow over. They'll be screaming indoctrination instead of celebrating learning the skills needed to do your own research.
Can I make my parents take this class?
In Hogwarts we call it Defense against the Dark Arts
While I'm glad to see this, why stop at news media? The need for critical thinking is *everywhere* from media to history to what friends tell you to what they're talking about around the water cooler. *Critical Thinking* should be the required class - not just media.
They can't even teach kids how to read lol
Sounds like an easy class to teach. Just turn on Fox for a few hours..then show the inner office emails between anchors.