241–250 of 490 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read what he's concerned about. It's not too difficult to suss out what he wants here. The fact that the mere mention of 2016 sent him into a complaining rant about laptops and lab leaks should tell you what you need to know.
whats your solution
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hunter Biden's laptop falls under this category. Corporate media and social media companies claim "fake news" and move to censor it a month before the election. An honest look at the actual reporting, as well as what followed, shows that this was not in fact the case.
As someone who actually engaged with that story, I found the reporting and posited facts to be incoherent and full of holes. It only made sense if one presumed the outcome. Literacy includes evaluating why something was covered by certain folks and not by others as well as the internal coherence and the inter-relationship.
Was the story of Russians electing Trump coherent and without holes?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But the landscape has become a lot more partisan/ideological in the last 10 years, particularly at universities, so I understand why people are skeptical/concerned. What if the propagandists are portraying it that way, in order to create that skepticism/concern. They do delegitimize one institution after another: Journalism, education, government, etc. - these are the big ones. > so much unabashedly propagandist co…
You don't have to "what if" it, people have already looked into it. In "The Coddling of the American Mind" they cite studies showing that universities are more left-leaning than they've ever been.
yeah, right. Will classes start with students reading Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent? I consider it a must-read.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It teaches about how to tell journalism apart from other kinds of information, like entertainment and opinion; the hallmarks of good reporting, like transparency; discerning assertion from verification, and evidence from inference; the idea of seeking out multiple sources and how to reconcile them, etc. It's more a toolbox of how to inform oneself, regardless of any specific source. Provided it can stick to that, I…
> But the landscape has become a lot more partisan/ideological in the last 10 years, particularly at universities, so I understand why people are skeptical/concerned. What if the propagandists are portraying it that way, in order to create that skepticism/concern. They do delegitimize one institution after another: Journalism, education, government, etc. - these are the big ones. > so much unabashedly propagandist co…
No? Okay, nevermind then..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bias is like an accent: people rarely notice their own. If you haven't seen the NY Times' bias, it probably matches your own.
It is also like an accent in that a bit of one is not bad at all, but a very heavy one makes things almost unrecognizable. "... has a bias" is trivially true for just about anything. That also makes that sentence useless unless you add more information.
Recognizing that "everyone has an accent" and "everyone has a bias" is about learning to think in greater depth than the natural human tendency to believe "I'm right, and everyone who sees the world differently is wrong." That endeavor is not useless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But the landscape has become a lot more partisan/ideological in the last 10 years, particularly at universities, so I understand why people are skeptical/concerned. What if the propagandists are portraying it that way, in order to create that skepticism/concern. They do delegitimize one institution after another: Journalism, education, government, etc. - these are the big ones. > so much unabashedly propagandist co…
You don't have to "what if" it, people have already looked into it. In "The Coddling of the American Mind" they cite studies showing that universities are more left-leaning than they've ever been.
“Centrism = unbiased” is itself a whole category of propaganda that is also easily disproved by the fact that centrist positions depends on the country!
Remember, an American centrist ‘s idea of foreign policy is to keep the drone strikes going, but leave the ground troops out.
The mixing of “biased”,”left-leaning” and “objective/subjective” is probably part of the stuff a news literacy course will go into! The world isn’t nearly divided into two parts that happen to align with the American psyche!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
can you provide examples of that? clarifying: you claimed there were errors, pls provide examples. You made a claim, its not unreasonable to be asked to support it.
I am not sure why are you asking. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_1619_Project Copy a little bit to show the dishonesty of the project creator: > In September 2020, lead 1619 Project writer Nikole Hannah-Jones criticized conservatives for their depiction of the project, arguing that it "does not argue that 1619 is our true founding".[12] Atlantic writer Conor Friedersdorf responded on Twitter by citing statements f…
the author: "reframe the country's history, understanding 1619 as our true founding"
I think this speaks to the fundamental issue that the entire conversation here AND the need for news literacy is about...taking a different lens on something cannot, by definition, be 'correct' or 'incorrect'. It is a perspective...it can be coherent or incoherent, it can be widely or not widely accepted. It is a claim, argumentation, it is not a fact. Reducing argumentation to 'a fact' or 'facts' debases discourse and is why we are stuck here as a society.
I distinctly remember realizing for the first time that you could tell a lie with a graph. I also remember seeing an "article" that was actually a disguised advertisement, which I would probably have overlooked in the past. Good class.
So, to me this doesn't seem new, but it seems like not everybody had that experience.
Still, I think the point of this article is not that schools have not taught those skills in the past, but that those fundamental literacy skills are now identified as 1) more important and tricky than ever, and 2) now there's a (branded) name for them.