# media literacy # principles of engagement * collect any arguments for all major standpoints. * continuously seek the most reliable and well-substantiated sources for each standpoint. * avoid passive consumption; acquire data through targeted queries. * treat dependent media primarily as a source for propaganda narratives and primary-source artifacts. * verify claims using multiple independent sources. * test sources on topics you know well. * do not accept premises without evidence; claims of factuality, rationality, or neutrality are not evidence. * distinguish fact, interpretation, and speculation. * detect suggestive framing; assess susceptibility to omission or distortion. * identify ad-hominem and ridicule replacing substantive argument. * identify emotional appeals; periodically ask yourself what new information has just been provided. * ask how material could be misleading. * recognize that you are most easily fooled by yourself, and second most easily by sides you are biased to. * recognize that humans are biased to believe they understand fully even when key information is missing. * understand that gut feeling can be completely wrong for abstract or distant issues. * understand opposing standpoints to be able to comprehend any standpoint. * achieve competence in arguing each standpoint. * limit trust in credentials to the process that confers them. * consider avoidance of defense, dialogue, or questioning as a sign that claims may be indefensible. * acknowledge the information domain as a battlespace alongside land, air, sea, and space. # areas - source evaluation: credibility, independence, transparency, authority - bias detection: political, cultural, cognitive, commercial - framing analysis: language choice, imagery, selection or omission of facts - fact verification: cross-checking claims using independent and primary sources - distinguishing content types: fact vs opinion, news vs advertising, reporting vs commentary - propaganda recognition: intent, techniques, and context - logical and rhetorical analysis: detecting fallacies, emotional appeals, false equivalences - third-party influence awareness: how external actors shape, filter, or distort received information - misinformation and disinformation identification: intentional vs unintentional falsehoods, manipulation tactics - media production awareness: how stories are sourced, edited, and distributed - audience analysis: recognizing how different audiences interpret the same content # phenomena * mockutainment: media presenting itself in informative formats but primarily aiming to entertain through ridicule, often framing issues for mockery at the expense of depth or accuracy. # misleading news patterns - highlights certain facts while omitting others, creating bias through selective omission - reporting on falling unemployment while omitting that the definition of "employed" was recently changed - cropping a photo to exclude people or objects that change the meaning of the scene - misleads about timing by presenting old stories as new or collapsing timelines for effect - reposting last year's flood photos as if they were from a current storm - implying two separate events happened on the same day - uses numbers and statistics without proper context, creating false impressions - citing a percentage increase without noting the small base rate - using absolute figures without population-adjusted comparisons - quotes experts or sources selectively to support a preferred narrative - quoting only the most pessimistic forecast from a panel of scientists - citing one sentence from a report while ignoring its main conclusion - creates false connections or trends from unrelated or isolated events - linking unrelated crimes to suggest a crime wave - portraying one extreme weather event as proof of a permanent climate shift - gives equal airtime to unequal arguments, implying false equivalence - giving a fringe conspiracy theory the same coverage as peer-reviewed science - debating verified facts as if still unsettled - reduces complex moral situations to black-and-white judgments - portraying a policy debate as purely good vs evil - framing a nuanced conflict as heroes vs villains - focuses on individual actors instead of examining underlying systems or structures - blaming a crisis solely on one politician while ignoring institutional failures - spotlighting one ceo as the cause of industry-wide problems - diverts attention from important but complex issues to trivial or emotionally satisfying ones - covering a celebrity scandal instead of legislative changes - focusing on an animal rescue during a major political crisis - reports what audiences want to hear instead of what is most relevant in context - tailoring headlines to confirm political biases - emphasizing local sports wins over major international news - manipulates emotion to drive engagement, through exaggeration, drama, or urgency - framing a rare event as "on the rise" - "breaking" labels for routine developments - uses vague or suggestive language to imply without clearly stating - "some say" or "it is believed" without attribution - hinting at wrongdoing without evidence # links wikipedia * [disinformation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinformation) * [fear, uncertainty, and doubt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty,_and_doubt)