Session 3

True or false? Guess!

Fake news, misinformation, and the role of media literacy

Teaser

Fake news or old propaganda, the world had being always confronted by lies, challenged by truth, and asked for the ability to distinguish opinions from facts. How does technology impact on the possibility to deceive lies? Is media literacy enough to fight against the amplifying power of algorithms? Do we need to rethink media literacy? And if yes, how?

Key words

Fake news, misinformation, online media, media literacy, intermediary liability, echo chambers, social media, digital literacy, multistakeholder analysis

Session description

Fake news or old propaganda, the world had being always confronted by lies, challenged by truth, and asked for the ability to distinguish opinions from facts. How does technology impact on the possibility to deceive lies? Is media literacy enough to fight against the amplifying power of algorithms? Do we need to rethink media literacy? And if yes, how?

Generations of students, adults, citizens, migrants, professionals have been exposed or excluded from media literacy. The internet, with its speed ubiquity and power, is adding new dimensions to a very old problem. How to recognise information, how to engage with the world at any age, from any social class, gender, and location, with a critical mind.

Education, as well as access and participation, are at the very foundation of democracy, often forgotten, under funded and regarded as incidental. We would like to discuss with you fake news, and the role of technology as amplifier; hear about practices of denounce and resistance, but also hear and share about practices of media literacy in the age of the Internet. This session will share tools, raises diversity of voices, listen to obstacles, and celebrate our champions.

Session format

The session will have a panel format with a brief introduction from the moderators and two/three speakers introducing the two main topics to set a common ground for all participants.

1. Fake news: examples from the region, how it works, what it implies.

2. Media Literacy: providing a background and some practices.

The session will then continue with working groups (two rounds of 15 minutes each) and end with a final debriefing. Each working group will be asked to identify 3-5 emerging questions on the issues of fake news or media literacy. Other groups will be responding to these questions. In the end, there will be a final debriefing and discussion.

Main roles

Key participants:

  • Narine Khachatryan, Safer Internet Armenia (online participation)
  • Małgorzata Pęk, Council of Europe
  • Filip Stojanovski, Metamorphosis Foundation, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

Moderators

  • Valentina Pavel, Association for Technology and Internet, Romania
  • Valentina Pellizzer, One World Platform, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Online moderatorDomen Savič, Državljan D, Slovenia

Rapporteurs:

  • Belma Kučukalić, One World Platform, Bosnia and Herzegovina
  • Olga Kyryliuk,  NGO ‘Digital Defenders Partners’, Ukraine
Session messages

  • New technologies bring more actors to reporting, thus democratising conversation, which is happening horizontally.
  • We should differentiate between propaganda and fake news. The first is about having a centre of power, which creates the vibrations that vibe the most. While the latter is related to entrepreneurs working with technology to deliver a message of the day following the bazaar mentality.
  • We also need to distinguish between fake news and unprofessional journalism, as we tend to overuse the term ‘fake news’.
  • We are living in the age of ‘fast food media’ that create short and not contextualised messages, and do not contribute to educating people, but rather the opposite. Media literacy can play a significant role in addressing this challenge.
  • Media literacy consists of digital skills, critical thinking, and communication skills. However, it is not solely about education, but even more about the socio-economic environment.
Resources

1. APC’s Frequently asked questions on internet intermediary liability

2. Brief summary of Internet intermediary liability, by Stanford Law School

3. Social Media and Fake News in the US 2016 Election, Stanford University Research | Summary of the study

4. The Macedonian Teens Who Mastered Fake News

5. Google CEO on fake news and its distribution

6. Research on identifying and veryfing news through social media

Relevant proposals

18, 19, (20), (26), 27, (29), 30, 33, (35), (41), 44, 45, (47), 48, (51), 58, (63) – See full list of proposals

Organising team

  • Valentina Pavel, Association for Technology and Internet, Romania (focal point)
  • Valentina Pellizzer, One World Platform, Bosnia and Herzegovina (focal point)
  • Irena Bojadzievska, Agency for Audio and Audiovisual Media Services, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
  • Narine Khachatryan, Safer Internet Armenia
  • Fotjon Kosta, Ministry of Energy and Industry, Albania
  • Eduard Levanyan, Media Education Center / Safer Internet Armenia
  • Nouneh Sarkissian, Media Initiatives Center, Armenia
  • Oliana Sula, University ‘Aleksandër Moisiu’, Albania
  • Ana Velkovska, American Bar Association, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
  • Contact points from SEEDIG’s executive committee: Lianna Galstyan, Sorina Teleanu

 

Comments are closed