Misinformation and disinformation in conjunction with the false illusion of Internet and media savvy are problematic in their own right. Combine this with post-truth, truthiness, filter bubbles, and confirmation bias, and it’s no wonder that fake news is so widespread. In an age in which Tweets and Facebook statuses are being reported as news and likes and shares are more sought after than the truth, information consumers need to be knowledgeable, sharp, tireless, and active users and creators of information in order to actually discern facts and true statements. This level of critical media consumption requires an understanding of why consumers are especially susceptible to fake news. Then we need to impart literacy skills to these users. Information professionals are perfectly poised to accept this challenge of improving critical media consumption, and expand existing information literacy conversations, strategies, and techniques.
Thinking is an action.
—bell hooks 2010, 7
In her writings about education and the need for improved and engaged pedagogy, the educator and writer bell hooks denounces the devaluation of the innate inquisitiveness and appetite that children have for learning; she argues that the interactive processes that young children employ to learn about their surroundings become passive once they begin formal schooling. Formal education teaches children to consume information without question in an effort “to educate them for conformity and obedience” (2010, 8). hooks challenges students and teachers to relish independent thoughts and reconnect with critical thinking. She says that critical thinking involves “discerning the who, what, when, where, and how of things—and then utilizing that knowledge in a manner that enables you to determine what matters most” (9).
There are other authors who, while taking a psychological or journalistic approach, concur with hooks and encourage information consumers to be proactive and selective with the information they absorb and act upon. Kovach and Rosenstiel (2011) suggest that consumers should be skeptical; this does not mean that individuals should be pessimistic and reject everything they hear and see. Rather, readers and listeners should not indiscriminately accept what they see and hear; instead, they should be continually questioning the information being presented, even if it’s presented by a trusted source. The authors also suggest that the current information divide in our (post-truth) society is that between those who create information and content, and those who consume that information in an uncritical way. Jackson and Jamieson (2007) refer to this as being caught up in the spin. Spin, which is equivalent to misinformation and sometimes disinformation, “paints a false picture of reality by bending facts, mischaracterizing the words of others, ignoring or denying crucial evidence, or just ‘spinning a yarn,’ by making things up” (vii). Levitin (2016) concurs and refers to this as counter knowledge, which is “misinformation packaged to look like fact and that some critical mass of people has begun to believe” (168). Counter knowledge, like mis/dis, can thrive because it may indeed contain a kernel of truth, some level of believability, and social capital that make it believable (170).
Fake news, spin, and counter knowledge profit from “persuasion by association” (Levitin 2016, 176), which explains that when mis/dis comes from a reliable, and perhaps mostly ingenuous source, it is likely not to be detected or interrogated. A good example of this particular phenomenon is Brian Williams, the former anchor of NBC’s Nightly News, who was terminated from his position for “embellishing” his reports and “misrepresenting” his participation in the stories he covered (Calamur 2015). Because Williams was considered a trusted source of information, his aggrandizements went undetected for years. Spin and counter knowledge are unquestionably precursors of fake news and alternative facts. Being curious, asking questions, respecting facts, and evaluating sources help information consumers to become “unspun,” become critical consumers, and become resistant to the spin often presented in the media (179).
There is no shortage of misinformation and disinformation on the Internet, and despite the rapid nature of their dissemination and their recalcitrant staying power, there are any number of sources that can be consulted to authenticate and repudiate suspect information. Snopes.com (www.snopes.com), the Centers for Disease Control (www.cdc.gov/hoax_rumors.html), Know Your Meme (http://knowyourmeme.com), and PolitiFact (www.politifact.com) are but a few examples of recognized sites that regularly address and debunk hoaxes, rumors, and urban legends that circulate on the Internet. Started in 1995, Snopes.com researches circulated stories and provides the historical context of rumors. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is a U.S. government agency, and its website is an easy way to confirm or deny medical information and rumors. Know Your Meme is another site that gives comprehensive information about the messages, visuals, and videos that appear regularly on social media sites. And PolitiFact is among the sites that deal specifically with political information and fodder. Since everyone has their own beliefs and opinions, all sites may not be appropriate for every audience; news sites, and the sites that aim to dispel myths, rumors, and other hoaxes, are variously categorized as liberal, conservative, left-leaning, right-leaning, or otherwise biased (Attkisson 2017; Jerz 2016). With this in mind, part of being a savvy consumer is being open to ideas that differ from your own, and locating sites that are appropriate yet still adhere to some basic tenets of information evaluation, such as referencing multiple sources to confirm information and checking sites for currency and reputable authors/creators. (Please see chapter 5 for more suggestions for evaluating information sources.)
In the days following the 2016 presidential election, numerous lists and sites emerged to shed light on the panoply of fake news, satire, propaganda, and otherwise misleading sites that currently dominate social media feeds, especially as it pertains to political information. Computer coders and hackers have joined the struggle, creating plug-ins that help Internet users understand dubious sites that appear in their news feeds and browsers; however, these hacks do not, and should not, take the place of individuals doing manual due diligence. Information evaluation cannot be totally outsourced. The majority of disinformation on the Internet could be uncovered with rudimentary evaluation skills. If information consumers would take the time and effort to make a few simple assessments, disinformation wouldn’t be so prevalent or insidious. In order to become critical consumers of information, users should question the currency of the information (or lack thereof), carefully examine the site’s URL, consider the language being used (i.e., language that is melodramatic, provocative, or absolute), consider the reasonableness of the information, and consider the reputation and leanings of the website providing the information (e.g., The Onion is a known satire site, and stories with that byline should be treated as fiction even if the headlines and content seem realistic). Another question to ask is if the information is reported elsewhere online (i.e., triangulating information). Although these are ostensibly easy questions to ask, critical information consumption is not instinctive and Internet users need to be taught to evaluate, organize, and effectively use information. Information consumers need to be proficient in multiple forms of literacy (Area and Pessoa 2012; Cope and Kalantzis 2009; New London Group 1996; Walsh 2010).
Specifically, critical information literacy (Eisenberg, Lowe, and Spitzer 2004; Elmborg 2006) and digital literacy (Bawden 2008; Bawden and Robinson 2002) would aid the average Internet user’s ability to seek, find, and use quality information, which in turn would promote more thoughtful discourse and learning. Critical information consumers should be literate in multiple domains and able to apply quality information to their daily lives. Such literacy skills would facilitate a shift from routine and mindless information-sharing and acceptance to the substantive evaluation of information.
Information literacy1 has long been discussed and taught in libraries, and refers to acquiring and building up the capacity to read, interpret, assess, and use information in everyday life (Kuhlthau 1987). Information literacy is not the same as conventional skills-based literacy; rather, it refers to a frame of reference for consuming information, or a type of critical thinking. Information literacy considers the larger context in which information is discovered and consumed, and it encourages users to seek information that is relevant and has the potential to be useful over the long term. Critical information literacy extends the concept of information literacy by advocating that information be viewed in situ, and that it be evaluated in relation to the underlying power structures that shape all information, and the acquisition of agency that comes with the acquisition of quality information (Accardi, Drabinski, and Kumbier 2010; Booth 2011; Elmborg 2006; Tisdell 2008).
Because the current proliferation of fake news is happening primarily online, digital literacy skills are also important to contemplate and incorporate. Along with the related concepts of media and visual literacy, digital literacy is in essence about being “deeply literate in the digital world” and being “skilled at deciphering complex images and sounds as well as the syntactical subtleties of words” (Lanham 1995). Paul Gilster (1997) describes digital literacy as the mastering of ideas and not keystrokes (or other techniques and technologies). The focus of media literacy is more specific, focusing on mass media such as television and radio, often when examining popular culture. Media literacy also examines media production, video games, and print products like comic books and graphic novels. Visual literacy (also referred to as graphic literacy) examines electronic and other types of visually based images, and focuses on the ability to decipher imagery and the intentional and unintentional messages that are projected therein.
While discrete areas of literacy are certainly important (e.g., media, digital, cyber, visual, mobile, health, new media, ICT, and information fluency), this report advocates that critical consumers of information adapt a metaliteracy approach. Thomas P. Mackey and Trudi E. Jacobson (2011, 2014) discuss metaliteracy as it pertains to library and information science. They describe metaliteracy in the following way:
Metaliteracy is an overarching and self-referential framework that integrates emerging technologies and unifies multiple literacy types. This redefinition of information literacy expands the scope of generally understood information competencies and places a particular emphasis on producing and sharing information in participatory digital environments. (2011, 62–63)
Specifically, metaliteracy asks us to understand the format type and delivery mode of information; evaluate dynamic content critically; evaluate user feedback of information; produce original content in multiple media formats; create a context for user-generated information; understand personal privacy, information ethics, and intellectual property issues; and share information in participatory environments (Mackey and Jacobson 2011). Metaliteracy clearly encompasses standard elements of information and other literacies, but it challenges information professionals to take a step back and look at the bigger literacy picture. Metaliteracy encourages critical thinking and collaboration, particularly in an online environment, and encourages participants to be active in the construction and distribution of knowledge. Metaliteracy provides a holistic lens through which to contemplate how critical consumers can interact with information; this approach focuses on the individual consumer, and puts an equal emphasis on the context that shapes information production and consumption.
The individual is a key part of the process, but the social context helps shape the experience. Social media environments are socially constructed spaces that rely on the contributions of individuals to create meaning. (Mackey and Jacobson 2014, 4)
Ultimately, the metaliterate learner is the active learner that bell hooks writes about (2010, 7). “The metaliterate learner is an active participant who is an effective communicator and translator of information. The metaliterate learner is an author of information in many forms” (Mackey and Jacobson 2014, 91). Metaliterate learners are critically engaged learners and are themselves content producers, who can contribute to discourse and can also successfully navigate the information landscape that is riddled with alternative facts, biases, spin, and counter knowledge. It is the metaliterate learner who may be the best equipped to confront and dispel fake news. Those in information professions, particularly the library profession, which has a long history of the practice and study of information literacy, are well positioned to work with the general public to improve critical thinking and information evaluation skills, and to promote the benefits of being metaliterate. Information professionals have a renewed opportunity and enhanced platform to assert their expertise and their willingness to co-create knowledge with their constituents.
NOTE
1. Please see the “Appendix: Additional Resources” later in this book for reading recommendations to engage more deeply with the literature surrounding the various forms of literacy.