#WednesdayWisdom There has been a lot of calling media outlets #FakeNews over the last several years, and I thought this chart was interesting (Expand to see recent trends). #DetectingDeception
2/ It's been pretty evident that calling things #FakeNews was a way to avoid stories that the name-caller just didn't like. That's deceptive of course. Two ways you might notice this.
3/ First, is the #FakeNews accusation only used when it is bad things about the accuser? Second, does the accuser proudly cite the very same source when the story is complimentary?
4/ As you #FightFakeNews, just telling someone "This source is good. This source is bad." is unlikely to work because it sounds like you are accusing them of being dumb or lazy.
5/ Gentle questions can help. When they say something's not true because it's in the fake news, you can say, "But didn't X cite a story from that same source just last week? Why would X do that if the source is fake?" #DetectingDeception#FightFakeNews
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Off to teach today - a few hours in a de-densified classroom with masked students. Based on news reports, planning on double mask on me, but spent some time looking for official guidance from a health department and 🦗. This seems troublesome. #PartyLikeAProfessor
2/ I mean, look at this. One Google search for double masks for #COVID19 yields all this conflicting advice.
This is an interesting summation from interviews with journalists covering taxi online cultures. Several interesting ideas including "to assess newsworthiness, one must also assess what weapons the story would hand to its audiences." datasociety.net/wp-content/upl…
2/ "Further, the choice
to engage with a false story – even in the effort to refute it – aligns with the interests of the manipulators, who see any form of amplification as a victory."
3/ Person-attacks... stories are popular and get clicks. "...stories should keep the story specific to the communities affected, focus on the impact of an attack, minimize sensationalist language and headlines, and reduce antihero framings of the perpetrator"
Today in #DetectingDeception is ... this. It's a good example of why reading past the tweet or headline is important, and also a good example of deceptive distraction.
2/ There's a full story, which you can read here. He basically went on, beyond the headline, to say that there are a variety of causes that could be examined. huffpost.com/entry/kevin-mc…
3/ That's probably true, but also beside the point. I think about it this way: I commute to work on an interstate. Very few people drive the speed limit of 65. I'd guess an average 75, with some folks going 90 or more. If everyone is too fast, is it wrong to pull anyone?
Today in #DetectingDeception is the false comparison. I've seen this graphic a few places on social media and I don't know if it's authentic, but for this discussion, that doesn't really matter. Here's why something like this would have issues.
2/ When you look at information, there are a few relevant questions you might ask:
Is it true?
Is it in context?
Is it relevant?
3/ I started by looking at the source. There IS a Major Cities Chiefs Association, and they did produce a report on last summer's protests you can find on their website. majorcitieschiefs.com
Recent/current/future events in the U.S. got you feeling helpless? Here's one thing you can do today, right from where you are, to help. #FightFakeNews#DetectingDeception
2/ When people feel unsure, they try to get information to understand the situation. That's human nature. In a swirl of toxic lies and deceptions, it's very risky. Everyone needs to check themselves before they believe or repeat.
3/ Deplatforming people and information linked to violence is a good decision, but also a dangerous one. It is leading people to believe that they have to go further to find trusted sources with secret knowledge.
Today in #DetectingDeception is your feelings and how they encourage misinformation. There was a little kerfuffle recently over a much-shared post saying (falsely) that Mitch McConnell had vowed to allow no Democrat-sponsored bills in the new term.
2/ The post's writer has said it was a parody, and a follow-up tweet noted "Maybe people mistake me for an influencer." Why would this post get shared so often (sometimes by public figures)? Two things: Anxiety and uncertainty.
3/ Researchers have looked at rumor spread for more than 70 years, and anxiety and uncertainty are pretty consistent factors. This federal government transition feature both. People want to know what's happening and are unsure.