Today's readings:
Caroline Jack, Lexicon of Lies (Data & Society)
Paul Cook, "Beyond 'Fake News': Misinformation Studies for a Postdigital Era" (Education in the Age of Misinformation, edited by Lana Parker)
Terms and concepts
What do we really mean when we talk about "fake news"?
The term "fake news" emerged in late 2016 as a convenient (if overly simplistic) name for a dangerous panoply of disinformation, misinformation, malinformation, propaganda, misleading content, and manipulated media. (In 2017, it was voted word of the year.)
"Fake news," though popular, is a blunt instrument. It misses the subtler, crucial distinctions among different types of misleading information and ignores the question of intent altogether. Some politicians and others use the term "fake news" to mean any news or information they don't like.
Fortunately, researchers and teachers have better terms at their disposal. There are three we will get to know and use today: problematic information (Jack, 2017), information disorder (Wardle & Derakhshan, 2017), and polluted information environments (Phillips & Milner, 2021).
Problematic information is a useful umbrella term that describes information that is “inaccurate, misleading, inappropriately attributed, or altogether fabricated” (Jack, 2017).
Misinformation: information that is unintentionally inaccurate or misleading.
Disinformation: information that is deliberately false or misleading.
Publicity & propaganda: “deliberate, systematic information campaigns, usually conducted through mass media forms” (Jack, 2017, p. 4).
Satire, parody, & culture jamming: information or media that intentionally spreads “fabricated, inaccurate, or exaggerated information to convey a critique or cultural commentary” (Jack, 2017, p. 11). Ex.) The Borowitz Report or The Onion
“filter bubbles” (Pariser, 2012) & algorithmic manipulation (Project Information Literacy, 2020)
manipulated images and AV: deepfakes and cheap fakes (Paris & Donovan, 2019)
Joe Biden Robocall (New Hampshire primaries 2024)
Breakout question Think of an example of a successful mis-, dis-, or malinformation threat to democracy and/or its institutions. What makes it a threat? How did it begin? What were/are its effects?
Information disorder, a term coined by Wardle & Derakhshan (2017), provides a nuanced conceptual framework for exploring, analyzing, and reporting on the many permutations of misleading and harmful misinformation in our contemporary digital information ecosystem. Information disorder hinges on both the relative truthfulness/falseness of the message and the motives of the sender.
Wardle & Derakhshan (2017) distinguish between three types of information disorder. The first two should look familiar:
- disinformation is “false and deliberately created to harm a person, social group, organization or country.”
- misinformation is “false, but not created with the intention of causing harm."
- malinformation is “based on reality, used to inflict harm on a person, organization, or country” (Wardle & Derakhshan, 2017, p. 20).
Adding yet another degree of nuance, Phillips & Milner (2021) employ an ecological frame to conceptualize our polluted information environments.
In their book You Are Here: A Field Guide for Navigating Polarized Speech, Conspiracy Theories, and Our Polluted Media Landscape, Phillips & Milner (2021) describe the problem as one of "networked pollution," a tense, information-saturated reality awash in the toxic sludge of information disorder, where it can be difficult to discern facts from fibs and outright fabrications, and everyone is impacted by the pollution.
Breakout question What role does the easy access to information and digital media play in the spread of problematic information and information disorder? How do you think our digital devices have changed our media consumption? How have they changed our brains and attention spans?
Post-truth
The term “post-truth” refers to a situation in society where the way information makes us feel has become more significant than whether that information is accurate, credible, or true.
One problem the post-truth era poses is that there is now so much information (i.e., Jay David Bolter's notion of digital plenitude) that we run the risk of becoming paralyzed in our ability to tell accurate from inaccurate information—often with disastrous consequences for democracy and society.
There are so many perspectives and so many ways to support these perspectives that it has become exceedingly difficult for people to navigate questions of truth, lies, fact, fiction, opinion, and bias in our contemporary information ecosystems.
Post-truth epistemology, along with other factors, has led to what the Rand Corporation (2018) calls "truth decay" in their influential and comprehensive report on the phenomenon.
Truth Decay
According to recent data from the Knight Foundation...
- Only 26% of Americans have a favorable opinion of the news media, the lowest level Gallup and Knight have recorded in the past five years, while 53% hold an unfavorable view.
- Across all political affiliations, more Americans say they hold an unfavorable opinion of the news media compared to a survey conducted in late 2019-early 2020. This rise is especially pronounced among independents but is also apparent among Democrats — who typically hold more favorable views of the media.
Other knowledge-producing institutions, like colleges and universities, are also experiencing a crisis of confidence.
Breakout question Where in Polish society and government do you see similar crises of confidence? To what extent are they fueled by problematic information? Other factors?
Deep Memetic Frames
Phillips & Milner (2021) view deep memetic frames as fundamental drivers of problematic information both on the web and IRL ("in real life"). In You Are Here, they examine several powerful examples of DMFs.
Deep memetic frames establish the boundaries of thought. They "direct the attention" in much the same way as Kenneth Burke's concept of terministic screens. Deep memetic frames manifest "ethical and ideological ways of being in the world" by shaping our realities (Phillips & Milner, 2021, p. 21).
And yet, unless we actively interrogate them, most of us have no idea these deep memetic frames even exist. Because we see and think through DMFs, we have trouble thinking around them.
First, they are frames because they are "sensemaking mechanisms that allow people to tell coherent stories about the world" (Phillips & Milner, 2021, pp. 19-20).
Second, they are deep insofar as they run to the core of our beings and our cherished, largely unchallenged understandings of the world, which of course we tend to think of as non-ideological and non-political, as "just the way things are."
And third, they are memetic in the sense famously defined by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins: "ideas moving back and forth between collective norms and individual actions, evolving as they travel" (Phillips & Milner, 2021, p. 20).
Final breakout question What are some of the prevalent deep memetic frames in Polish society? How do these relate to or intersect with government and democracy? How have they evolved and/or adapted over time?
Resources & further reading
Check, Please! Starter Course. Michael Caulfield. A three-hour online course that introduces students to strategies for fact-checking and source verification online.
First Draft News. Claire Wardle. A global non-profit dedicated to empowering journalists, policymakers, and the public about information disorder.
Media Manipulation Casebook. Joan Donovan. An excellent classroom resource on media manipulation of all kinds that includes a helpful glossary of key terms and in-depth case studies of manipulated media that are perfect for classroom use.
The SIFT Method. Michael Caulfield. This primer on the classic fact-checking heuristic comes from the University of Chicago Library.
Truth Decay. Michael D. Rich & Jennifer Kavanagh for the RAND Corporation. An extensive report from 2018 on the changing dynamics of trust and knowledge in the post-truth era that delves into both the causes of "truth decay" and its effects.
Mind over Chatter. Mark Canada, Christina Downey, Paul Cook, & Polly Boruff-Jones. Five interactive Canvas modules and a companion teaching manual that introduces students to cognitive biases and other habits of mind that can obscure the truth. Mind over Chatter 2.0 (revised with two new modules) to be released in Fall 2024!
Snopes. David Mikkelson. The granddaddy of all fact-checking sites, this repository began as an urban legend and folklore website and is now considered one of the top fact-checking sites on the web. Snopes.com, which was founded in 1994, has been around for nearly as long as the web itself.
Data & Society. dana boyd. Produces original research on cutting-edge topics in the world of digital culture, including AI and automation, algorithmic manipulation, disinformation, and the impact of technology on labor and health.
Thank you so much for your time and energy today. I appreciate your participation, and I look forward to hearing from you as you plan your work for the new academic year. Please don't hesitate to reach out to me (paulcook@iu.edu).