The following comments are based on a recent book by Lee McIntyre – Post-Truth. I suggest it as a useful read for any educator interested in information literacy, science denial, and similar topics. I think it supports my observation that teaching students to evaluate the credibility of the online resources they encounter is not enough to assure they develop an accurate representation of their world. A broader approach to online literacy is required. This book offers some suggestions, but it is possibly more useful in identifying the multiple factors that have created the present information environment in which we presently function.
I will not attempt to write a summary of the multiple issues McIntyre’s book identifies. The resulting text would be far too long for a blog post. I will attempt to identify some of the key factors the book identifies as I interpret them. The result is more an outline of factors than a complete description. When I offer my own observations or comments, I will do so within brackets so my ideas can be differentiated from by summary of the author’s comments.
- Personal factors – Asch conformity [influence of group position], confirmation bias [Author seems to propose a brain predisposed to support existing personal perspectives – I see as a constructivist model of learning.]
- Decline of mainstream media due to decline in ad revenue and readers/viewers going elsewhere, financial difficulties result in decline in number of actual reporters, decline in shared information experience as readers/viewers do not have a common information experience.
- Rise of 24/7 news, much more time spent on opinion relative to actual news, embrace of a perspective/bias, encourage interest/viewers through promotion of conflict. Presenting both sides of a story when one side has little credibility confuses viewers and feeds personal biases – objectivity should not be confused with objectivity.
- Social media – selection of friends, bias in what friends share, bias in what service feeds reader to suit their values
- Weak approach of formal science – science is always questioning and suggesting more research would be helpful. Misleads public as to what is known because of this cautious approach.
- Generation of purposeful falsehoods likely to be embraced by target group. Falsehoods given greater reach by sympathetic audience and bots.
Some ideas regarding what can be done
- One remedy is heterogeneous group interaction – develop an appreciation for the scrutiny of others [This fits the value of argumentation]
- Important to call out, rather than ignore lies no matter how obvious the falsehood.
- Invest in a quality news source. Free is not free and not suited to meaningful learning.
