upworthy

fact checking

New research shows how to fight misinformation.

The rise of misinformation on social media has been a monumental stress test for the world’s critical thinking skills. Misinformation has had a huge influence on elections, public health and the treatment of immigrants and refugees across the world.

Social media platforms have tried to combat false claims over the past few years by employing fact-checkers, but they haven’t been terribly effective because those who are most susceptible to misinformation don’t trust fact-checkers.

“The word fact-checking itself has become politicized,” Cambridge University professor Jon Roozenbeek said, according to the Associated Press. Further, studies show that when people have incorrect beliefs challenged by facts, it makes them cling to their false assumptions even harder.

These platforms have also attempted to remove posts containing misinformation that violates their terms of service, but this form of content moderation is often seen as insufficient and is often applied inconsistently.


via Mattias Berg/Flickr

How do we combat dangerous misinformation online if removing false claims or debunking them hasn’t been effective enough? A new study published in the journal Science Advances by a team of university researchers and Jigsaw, a division of Google, has found a relatively simple solution to the problem they call “pre-bunking.”

Pre-bunking is an easy way of inoculating people against misinformation by teaching them some basic critical thinking skills. The strategy is based on inoculation theory, a communication theory that suggests one can build resistance to persuasion by exposing people to arguments against their beliefs beforehand.

The researchers learned that pre-bunking was effective after conducting a study on nearly 30,000 participants on YouTube.

“Across seven high-powered preregistered studies including a field experiment on YouTube, with a total of nearly 30,000 participants, we find that watching short inoculation videos improves people’s ability to identify manipulation techniques commonly used in online misinformation, both in a laboratory setting and in a real-world environment where exposure to misinformation is common,” the recently published findings note.

The researchers uploaded videos into YouTube ad slots that discussed different types of manipulative communication used to spread false information such as ad hominem attacks, false dichotomies, scapegoating and incoherence.

Here’s an example of a video about false dichotomies.

Researchers found that after people watched the short videos, they were significantly better at distinguishing false information than they were before. The study was so successful that Jigsaw is looking to create a video about scapegoating and running it in Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. These countries are all combating a significant amount of false information about Ukrainian refugees.

There’s an old saying, “If you give a man a fish, he’ll eat for a day. Teach that man to fish and he’ll eat forever.” Pre-bunking does something very similar. We can either play a game of whack-a-mole where social media platforms have to suss out misinformation on a minute-by-minute basis or we can improve the general public’s ability to distinguish misinformation and avoid it themselves.

Further, teaching people to make their own correct decisions about misinformation will be a lot more effective than pulling down content and employing fact-checks. These tactics only drive vulnerable, incredulous people toward misinformation.


This article originally appeared on 8.30.22

Even before he became president, Donald Trump was known for his unhindered use of Twitter. He and his many press secretaries have lauded the president's frequently used and abused social media account as his way of connecting directly with the people, but if you scroll through his feed, it usually seems more like a venue for him to brag, bully people, and air his grievances. Oh, and lie a whole bunch.

Then there is Steak-umm, the anti-Trump Twitter account. And by "anti-Trump" I don't mean against Trump, but rather the opposite of Trump. Instead of griping and sharing falsehoods that constantly need fact-checking while being the single biggest source of coronavirus misinformation, Steak-umm use their account to share helpful tips for avoiding misinformation in the midst of a confusing pandemic, to explain psychological concepts like "cognitive dissonance" and "dualism," and to encourage people to really examine and think about things before sharing them.

In other words, Trump tweets conspiracy theories while Steak-umm tweets about how to not fall for conspiracy theories.


That's right, this wisdom is coming from a frozen sliced steak brand. Welcome to 2020, y'all.

I mean, bestill my credible-information-and-verifiable-data-loving heart.





This whole thread ^^ is worth reading. It's pinned to the top of their Twitter page.

Meanwhile:

(Side note: The one and only thing POTUS and Steak-umm seem to share is a complete disregard for capitalization rules. Trump capitalizes words totally randomly, while Steak-umm capitalizes pretty much nothing. It's a world gone mad, I say. As a former English teacher, this haphazard capitalizing is all just incredibly painful.)

Anyway, moving on...this tweet right here is 100% truth, as evidenced by every comment section on the internet:

Scientists have even taken notice of the company's Twitter account as it tackles coronavirus misinformation.

Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at Columbia University in New York, is one of many infectious disease experts studying the coronavirus. She learned about Steak-umm's tweets through an online group of fellow scientists.

"It's really important that people are being informed and are able to look for good information themselves — but also to remember that we're all going through this together, and we're all human beings, and we're all experiencing a really difficult time," she told Business Insider. "It's very unusual to see the corporate account for a brand of frozen processed meat sort of marrying those two concepts."

But that's exactly what Steak-umm does. While some of us feel tempted to take a "Why are people such idiots?!" approach when we see people acting like fools in a pandemic, Steak-umm explains the answer to that question in a way that doesn't blame, but encourages thoughtful processing of information. (Which of course will be ignored or rejected by said idiots, but it sure makes some of us feel good to see such eloquence and intelligence, especially in the cesspool of social media.)



Also unlike the Tweeter-in-Chief, Steak-umm is remarkably self-aware and able to provide an honest and transparent reflection of the benefits it derives from tweeting the way it does.



Like, whoa.

And they're right. People are buying their product because they like their social media statements.

Not all of Steak-umm's tweets are filled with civilization-saving gems of wisdom, of course. I mean, there's this:

And this silliness, beeflings.

They also get cute with certain spellings, always writing the word "meet" as "meat" and "mistake" as "misteak."

If you don't usually buy your meat in the frozen convenience food section and aren't familiar with Steak-umm, this tweet describes the brand perfectly:

Thank you, Steak-umm (and their social media manager, Nathan), for fighting the good fight and adding something of value to the Twitter world.

Steak-umm bless, indeed.

The fight to save the Affordable Care Act has migrated to a new battleground: Facebook.

Since early September, a viral Facebook status has been making the rounds, claiming that the Trump administration is attempting to sabotage the law by making enrolling in a health plan on Healthcare.gov confusing and difficult.


The wording varies from post to post, but the message is largely the same. It urges users to "copy and paste" and to employ a linguistic trick meant to boost the post's prominence on the social network:

CONGRATULATIONS! The White House is trying to stop you from enrolling in Obamacare. Fortunately, your friends (like me) are posting this and using the word "CONGRATULATIONS" so that Facebook's algorithm shows this to more people. Enrollment for 2018 Affordable Care Act (ACA/Obamacare) starts November 1 and ends December 15. Snopes verified that the enrollment period was shortened and GOP has cut by 90% the funding to advertise these deadlines. Administration is also taking the website down for "maintenance" for 12 hrs at a time on weekends for most of the enrollment period when working people might most likely need to use it - doing what they can to sabotage ACA. (Please leave a comment saying, "Congratulations!" to influence FB's algorithm to increase the visibility of this posting.) THEN, PLEASE COPY AND PASTE ON YOUR OWN TIMELINE.

"[It] sucks when I'm told I don't deserve affordable health care and when it's implied it's my fault I have a pacemaker or need pain meds," says Jackie Todd, a filmmaker who posted the status to her page in September. She believes her chronic heart condition would make her uninsurable, should the Affordable Care Act be repealed.

The "congratulations!" Facebook status offers users the twin satisfactions of doing one's civic duty and hacking Facebook's mysterious "algorithm." And the accusations of sabotage jibe with recent reports that claim the Trump administration is rolling back its support for the law.

At the same time, it's hard not to be skeptical of a random post that appears in your feed.

Should you believe it? Should you share it?

That depends on a few things. And I looked into those things.

Is the information about the ACA in the post accurate? Broadly, yes. Let's break it down:

"Enrollment for 2018 Affordable Care Act (ACA/Obamacare) starts November 1 and ends December 15."

True, according to Healthcare.gov. That's six weeks shorter than the 2016 open enrollment period, which ran from Nov. 1 to Jan. 31.

"Snopes verified that the enrollment period was shortened and GOP has cut by 90% the funding to advertise these deadlines."

Also true, with a caveat. On Aug. 31, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services announced it would allocate $10 million for its ACA promotional budget, down from $100 million in 2016. The agency claimed that despite doubling advertising funding from 2015 to 2016, "first-time enrollment [declined] by 42 percent," justifying the deep cuts.  

As for the caveat? Snopes didverify the information — though the claim that the "GOP" is responsible is not exactly right, as the adjustment was made by the Trump administration, not any particular political party.

"Administration is also taking the website down for 'maintenance' for 12 hrs at a time on weekends for most of the enrollment period when working people might most likely need to use it."

Again, true. In late September, the Department of Health and Human Services announced it would be taking Healthcare.gov offline on five Sundays during the open enrollment period, from 12 a.m. to 12 p.m.

Is the "congratulations" tactic an effective way to "hack" Facebook's mysterious algorithm?

Unfortunately, probably not. At least no more so than simply posting the information to Facebook without the "congratulations" attached.

The claim that including "congratulations" in a status boosts a post's ranking on Facebook comes from from a 2014 Wired article, which reported that Mark Zuckerberg proposed the idea himself, after noticing that a post about a colleague's birthday appeared higher on his own feed than a post about the birth of his own niece.

That's not the case today. A Facebook spokesperson said that including highlighted words like "congratulations" (which trigger delightful special effects when clicked) do nothing to improve a post's ranking on the news feed. He noted that posts that feature the word do "tend to get more engagement from people on the platform," which does increase their reach.

So should you post it yourself?

"Anything and everything is helpful in spreading the word," says Lori Lodes, co-founder of Get America Covered. A former director of communications at Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Lodes was responsible for outreach efforts during Healthcare.gov's second and third open enrollment periods. Get America Covered was founded to fill the gaps left by the administration's cutbacks, in part by putting together resources to help individuals encourage those in their social networks to enroll.

In the meantime, Lodes supports sounding the alarm on Facebook.

"The most important thing people can do right now is to get the word out — whether that is talking to friends, sharing on social media or hanging up signs in their neighborhoods," she says.

The next few months will help determine whether the Affordable Care Act thrives or merely survives.

Can anyone really help replace the well-funded, coordinated effort of a large federal bureaucracy?

Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images.

That part remains to be seen. But it's up to you, regardless.

Congratulations!

Please copy and share?

Numbers don't lie, but graphs can.

You're reading an article, perusing an ad, or watching the news when you spot a kickass chart or infographic. Finally, a way to share information that's impermeable to opinions and falsehoods, right? Well, not exactly.

That's why, in the era of bogus news sites, information dissection is more important than ever.

Graphs and data visualizations are easier to make than ever before, so there's nothing stopping anyone from using accurate facts and figures in an irresponsible or dishonest way.


In her animated lesson for TED-Ed, Lea Gaslowitz breaks down how to catch a misleading graph before it catches you.

Here are five simple things to look for when analyzing a graph.

1. Scale: That Y-axis is really important.

This is a graph showing truck reliability. At first glance, it appears Chevy crushes the competition hands down.

[rebelmouse-image 19473956 dam="1" original_size="400x225" caption="GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube." expand=1]GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube.

However, this graph uses the same data, but with a scale from 0% to 100% instead of 95% to 100%.

[rebelmouse-image 19473958 dam="1" original_size="400x225" caption="Like Drake, this graph goes from 0 to 100, real quick. GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube." expand=1]Like Drake, this graph goes from 0 to 100, real quick. GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube.

"This is one of the most common ways graphs misrepresent data," Gaslowitz said. "It's especially misleading with bar graphs, since we assume the size of the bars is proportional to the values."

The X-axis is important too, and Gaslowitz cautions it can be manipulated just as easily.

2. Ask yourself: What does the visualization actually show, and does it make any sense?

The economic cost of mass incarceration is more than $1 trillion dollars. This chart, explores how many prison cells it would take to store $1 trillion in cash. Volume is not a very useful measure in this case, but it's presented in bold, block letters as if it's vital information. Don't be fooled by typography or because they showed their work.

Image via WTFviz/Tumblr.

3. Cherry-picking: Great for fruit pies, less so for graphs and charts.

When a group or individual uses a graph to make a point, they may pick and choose which information to include. It's called cherry-picking, and it can lead to wholly inaccurate charts.

The graph from the National Weather Service makes it look like 2015 had the second highest number of consecutive days without rain. It didn't. The second longest streak was 62 days in 1984. But this graph only shows the record year and the past five years for comparison. That's not to say it intended to deceive, but that's a consequence of limiting the data.

4. In life and in graphs, you can't ignore context.

Gaslowitz shared two graphs on ocean temperature. The first showed the changes in temperature over time, but that doesn't capture the full story because even a half-degree rise can have a major effect.

[rebelmouse-image 19473960 dam="1" original_size="400x225" caption="GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube." expand=1]GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube.

Showing the increase or decrease in ocean temperature by the amount of increase is a more appropriate context.

[rebelmouse-image 19473961 dam="1" original_size="400x225" caption="GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube." expand=1]GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube.

5. Go straight to the source, and look at it right in its source eyes.

Take a look at where you're getting the information from. Is it a trusted, reliable news source with fact-checkers and editorial standards? Is it an advertisement or paid study? The source matters. If you're unsure, try to find the data somewhere else to double check, especially before you share it.

[rebelmouse-image 19473962 dam="1" original_size="400x225" caption="GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube." expand=1]GIF via TED-Ed/YouTube.

So read closely, trust your gut, and remember: Taking the extra time to think critically is always worth it. Always.