Education helps—but not in the way you think.

You can be highly educated.
You can know how media works.

And still fall for fake news.

This thread unpacks why knowledge alone isn’t protection. Image
Gradim & Amaral (2020) review the research:

Media literacy improves our ability to analyze content.

But it doesn’t automatically override emotional reasoning or identity bias.

It helps—but it’s not flawless armor.
In fact, more educated people can be more skilled at justifying their own biases.

They:

Argue more effectively for their side
Dismiss opposing facts more confidently
Are less likely to admit uncertainty

Cognition becomes a tool of rationalization.
So what does education actually do well?

It helps people:

Spot patterns of manipulation
Question sources
Slow down information processing
Recognize frames and rhetorical tricks

But only if applied critically.
And media literacy isn't one-size-fits-all.

It must account for:

Political context
Cultural narratives
Platform-specific dynamics
Emotional literacy

Knowing how media works ≠ understanding how you react to it.
The illusion of immunity is real.

The better informed you are, the more confident you may feel.

That confidence can become a blind spot.

Being right too often makes people stop asking if they could be wrong.
So what’s a healthier stance?

Curiosity over certainty
Questions over conclusions
Self-reflection alongside skepticism
Willingness to revise your views

Media literacy works best when paired with humility.
The goal isn’t just to spot fake news.

It’s to understand:

Why it works
Why we want to believe it

And how we can build habits that resist it, even when it appeals to us.
Truth isn’t a fixed skill.
It’s a practice.

And it requires more than facts.
It requires reflection.

Otherwise, education becomes another weapon in the hands of bias.
Bottom line:

Being smart isn’t enough.
Being informed isn’t enough.

To resist fake news, you need more than knowledge—you need self-awareness.

Next: “Repetition builds belief—even when we know it’s fake.”

#FakeNews #MediaLiteracy

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Gavril Ducu 🇷🇴🇩🇪🇺🇲🇳🇱🇪🇺@🇺🇦

Gavril Ducu 🇷🇴🇩🇪🇺🇲🇳🇱🇪🇺@🇺🇦 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DucuGavril

Jun 29
How “fake news” became a weapon.

It started as a joke.
Became an accusation.

And turned into a global threat to journalism and truth.

This recap covers what Cunha et al. (2018) taught us about the rise—and distortion—of a viral term.
Our source:

Cunha et al. (2018)

Fake News as We Feel It: Perception and Conceptualization of the Term ‘Fake News’ in the Media

Presented at SocInfo, published by Springer

academia.edu/43228329/Fake_…
Key finding #1: The 2016 election was a turning point.

Before 2016, “fake news” meant satire or clickbait.

After 2016, it became a political slur—used to discredit real journalism.

One moment redefined global media language.
Read 11 tweets
Jun 29
Why precision matters.

“Fake news” became a global insult.

But it was never a clear category.

This thread explains why vague, viral language is dangerous—and how we fight it.
Cunha et al. (2018) show that “fake news” changed fast.

It went from describing satire and hoaxes—to being a political weapon, media frame, and emotional trigger.

But its definition never caught up.
Why is that a problem?

Because vague terms are:

Easy to politicize
Hard to challenge
Ripe for manipulation

If “fake news” can mean anything, it can be used against everything.
Read 10 tweets
Jun 29
When a joke stops being funny.

“Fake news” used to mean satire.

Then it became slander.

This thread explains how humor lost its clarity—and why that confusion became a powerful tool for manipulation.
Cunha et al. (2018) point to a key shift:

Before 2016, “fake news” often referred to sites like:

The Onion
The Daily Show
Saturday Night Live

It meant parody. It meant commentary. It meant “clearly not real.”
But satire relies on one thing: shared understanding.

When audiences know the joke, it’s humor.
When they don’t—it’s misinformation.
And when people confuse the two, trust breaks down.

That’s where the danger starts.
Read 10 tweets
Jun 29
How one election redefined a global term.

Before 2016, “fake news” meant satire, hoaxes, or clickbait.

After 2016, it became a political weapon.

This thread explains how the U.S. election made “fake news” a global insult.
Cunha et al. (2018) show how fast the shift happened.

They analyzed:

The rise of “fake news” in media articles
The surge in emotional negativity around the term
The global uptake of a U.S.-rooted phrase

The tipping point: the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Before the election, “fake news” had low visibility.

It appeared occasionally to describe:

Satirical news

Parody websites

Obvious fabrications for clicks

It was informal. Sometimes even playful.
Read 10 tweets
Jun 29
“Fake news” didn’t start as a political weapon.

It was once used to describe satire.

Then it became a global slur.
Now it's used to undermine truth itself.

This series looks back at when—and how—that shift began.
Our source:

Cunha et al. (2018)
Fake News as We Feel It: Perception and Conceptualization of the Term ‘Fake News’ in the Media

Presented at SocInfo 2018 (Springer)

academia.edu/43228329/Fake_…
Why this matters:

We’re in 2025.

“Fake news” has become a tool to:

Smear journalists
Suppress dissent
Justify censorship
Erase inconvenient truths

Understanding how that started is part of resisting it.
Read 10 tweets
Jun 29
Digital espionage isn’t flashy anymore. It’s quiet, simple, and devastating.

The Dutch government just went public with a warning about a Russian cyber actor:

LAUNDRY BEAR, also known as Void Blizzard.

Here’s what their tactics tell us about the future of cyber conflict. Image
Source:
🇳🇱 AIVD & MIVD Joint Public Report
May 27, 2025



This is rare: a detailed, declassified intel advisory.

And it’s a warning to everyone.aivd.nl/documenten/pub…
How espionage went digital

Forget high-tech sabotage.

LAUNDRY BEAR uses “living-off-the-land” tactics:

They don’t drop malware
They use tools already inside the system
They mimic regular users

It’s stealth over spectacle.
Read 15 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(