The Easiest Ways to Verify the Veracity of a Viral Tweet. Don't allow a troll use your emotions for his own advantage
On your phone, you have access to the whole total of human knowledge—as well as the viewpoints of millions of others. Unfortunately, not everyone who shares information is trustworthy. Some people or sources may intentionally mislead you, while others may do it unintentionally.
The next time you read a viral tweet full of spectacular news that you can't believe is genuine, take a moment to reflect. It may not be accurate at all, and while you may feel prompted to communicate it to your mother, friends, classmates, or—with a simple retweet—your whole following, keep in mind that the implications of disseminating misleading information can be disastrous. Here's how to rapidly verify the veracity of a popular tweet.
First, a word on media literacy
This isn't the quick fix we promised, but doing some effort today to improve your media literacy can help you recognize suss material faster in the future. To be honest, media literacy should be taught in schools, especially since our digitally enhanced environment changes around us at a rapid pace. Regrettably, it isn't. (In case you hadn't noticed, the American school system has a propensity of glossing over or simply disregarding tough things.)
In the same way that you had to relearn the true history of holidays or the fundamentals of sex education as an adult, you must now tackle media literacy on your own. Fortunately, professors and other major thinkers have observed how unprepared the typical adult is for their everyday interactions with fake news and contextless tweets. For example, the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill offers an entire webpage dedicated to assisting you in improving your talents. In a nutshell, here's what you need to do:
- Recognize the media landscape. A headline or tweet that elicits a strong feeling, such as indignation, is intended to do so. If there's a link connected, you can sure someone wants you to click it, spend time on that site, and contribute to their ad revenue. If it's a solitary tweet, recognize that the creator wants retweets, which will get them additional retweets, followers, engagement, and, in certain cases, money or clout. You'll be less motivated to engage if you suspect that your emotions are being used to line someone else's wallets or elevate their position. What do you get out of it, besides than elevated blood pressure and a reputation for being a little gullible?
- Take note of the wording. Is the tweet in issue emotionally charged or does it have a clear point of view? A reliable source's news will be simple. We'll get to how to Google for more information in a minute, but for now, practice reframing anything you're reading in a calmer, less furious tone. Is the popular tweet still telling you anything interesting without the sensationalism?
- Create an own database of reliable news sources. This will take some time, but spend some time on the homepages of news organizations such as the Associated Press. Then repeat the process with tabloid outlets. Spend enough time doing this, and you'll begin to notice the telltale symptoms of overhyping news while underdelivering on anything worthy of a genuine reaction. If you apply that new perspective to everything, even tweets, you'll be a media literacy expert in no time. Less sensationalism and more context are preferred.
- Recognize your source. A columnist or writer is not the same as a reporter. A point of view is not the same as a fact. Always consider who wrote the tweet you're viewing and what they stand to gain from it. If they work in politics, or for a certain group, or are otherwise compelled to broadcast their own views far and wide, they will naturally want to make their material as controversial as possible. Emotional responses determine who wins in a fight of ideas.
Take a look at the know-it-alls in the Twitter replies
You may be a casual news consumer, a placid scroller vulnerable to surprising information. Some individuals, on the other hand, are obsessed with this things and will rush to be the first to point out that an attached video supposedly depicting current-day violence is years old or that a quotation is incorrectly credited to a historical figure. Allow their desire to be a public-facing know-it-all to assist you, but keep in mind that they, too, have a bias.
Check to see whether Twitter flagged it as a false or misleading claim
In addition, Twitter adds small alerts to erroneous or misleading statements. We can debate Twitter's probable biases as well, but for now, simply click on the notice. It will take you to a website with more background about the tweet in issue, allowing you to create a better educated view. If a claim becomes popular enough, Twitter will include fact-checking resources on the claim in its Trending section.
Keep in mind that anybody who creates spectacular tweets has a vested interest in influencing your emotions.
Google the quote without using Biased terminology
Remove any prejudiced or emotionally charged language, such as "indoctrinating" or "woke mob," and reduce it to its most basic, impartial form, which you can then Google.
Consider the uproar over what right-wing influencers and media sites dubbed a "free crack pipe scheme." Rep. Madison Cawthorn and Sen. Marco Rubio have been certain for weeks that the administration plans to distribute "free crack pipes" in low-income regions.
"There is no end in sight for this craziness," Rubio stated in a tweet that received thousands of likes. Of course, these kind of tweets receive a lot of retweets and likes but provide little to no context. This is when you go to Google and search for the abbreviated words. "Lunacy" is out, but if you Google "Biden administration crack pipes," you'll discover fact-checks from respected outlets that dug into those context-free tweets and tried to explain what you should know. (This is when your personal strong outlet database comes in helpful.)
If you come across a viral, context-free tweet before the big media sites can provide an in-depth fact-check, read all you can. In this case, the $30 million funding from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Programs Administration is not for crack pipe distribution, but rather for harm reduction services meant to minimize overdoses and the spread of infections among drug users. You'll also notice that the grant's announcement was months ago, yet it received little attention until the "free crack pipe" anger cycle.
Tweets about "free crack pipes" sound ludicrous and shortsighted if context is added, even when they come from high-profile government leaders. Keep in mind that anybody who creates spectacular tweets has a vested interest in influencing your emotions. What benefit do politicians receive from inciting fury and fear? Vote if they pledge to do something about the problem they just convinced you of.
But now that you have more information, you can go ahead and be one of the know-it-alls in the comments. Have some fun.
No comments:
Post a Comment