if you're watching cable news, one person is interviewing four people at the same time you see them in all of those little squares. And each of them has a different role. One of them might be another reporter who was assigned to that sort of beat that is covering that topic. But one might be a commentator, one might be a politician, who's on there, basically, to pontificate. So even just educating yourself on who has what role in the media. And knowing that is a great way to kind of understand the difference between opinion
in the digital age, it's harder than ever before to figure out what is news and what might be fake news. This is random acts of knowledge presented by Heartland Community College. I'm your host, Steve fast. Today, we're talking about news literacy, what it means and even what is news. With so much information out there? How can you be sure how you can interpret it, process it and really know what's going on?
Hi, everyone. My name is Karla Huffman, I am a professor of Communication and new media here at Heartland Community College. And I teach well, the dreaded public speaking course that every student has to take. And then I teach media courses. One is an introduction to mass media, where we talk about media literacy, which is connected to our topic today, and how students can look at the world through the lens of the media and how they can use the media and how the media sometimes uses them. And then I teach a Media Writing course where students learn to write in all of the different forms of mass media, writing venues, including social media, broadcast, print, and so forth. You say
you teach your students in the credit courses, media literacy. And I know that you also have developed a continuing education course for public education, for news literacy, what's the difference between media literacy and news literacy.
So I think of media literacy is kind of the umbrella term, meaning that it is teaching people to use their critical thinking skills to judge the reliability and the credibility of all media. So media literacy, we're looking at books and TV and movies, and social media, music, all of those things, and thinking about how they influence our daily lives, how much we are persuaded by them. We hear a lot about this with kids, and advertising towards kids, and whether some things are ethical or not. Because sometimes kids don't know the difference between reality, and then what they see on TV. And then sometimes we look at it as you know, the models that we see on front of magazines, and thinking that oh, this is how other people look. And the fact is, it's not usually how other people look. Those are photoshopped, those are manipulated in some ways. And that's using your media literacy skills to realize that, oh, the media is not always giving me very factual information. But yet it has such a huge impact on my life. News Literacy. Yep, on the other hand, kind of narrows that down strictly to news, or anytime somebody is trying to give you information that is important to know. And so that is us using your critical thinking skills to judge the credibility, the reliability of news, and that can be print that can be broadcast, or that can be Internet
nowadays, is it harder to tell what is news and what is not news? There seems to be, on many levels, a blurring of the lines between what people would call news what some people brand is fake news and things that are purely opinion, or even parody that some people maybe interpret as news.
Yeah, basically, since the digital age, it has exploded. And I would say sometimes the lines aren't even blurred, there's just they're non existent anymore. Especially because we live in a 24/7 information cycle. We used to call it a new cycle like 24/7 cable news. But now we have access to information every time we turn around. We have access it just here on campus every time you turn around, here's a message from somebody or here's something on a message board. We're getting emails about things. We're hearing podcasts, we have teacher announcements, and it all just kind of starts to become one big ball of information. And sometimes then we have a really hard time thinking about okay, I'm paying attention to something is what I'm paying attention to credible. am I considering this news? Or is this someone giving their opinion or trying to get me to do something?
This leads into kind of a couple of different ways that information can get mixed up and interpreted. There's, I guess, an issue of misinformation. And then there's this information. Now at this point is suddenly kind of a dated example. But I remember in 911, in the hours that it was developing, many of us became, you know, solely focused on consuming news and all the different things that we could hear from different outlets. And actually thinking back on it, there was a lot of misinformation that was happening at the time. And at the time in the moment. There were a lot of professional, legitimate news sources, but they just got parts of it wrong, but they were trying to get whatever information they could out there. Disinformation is, is not people making mistakes. It's something different, right?
It's all about intention in that case. So yes, misinformation, is inaccurate information. The facts are not necessarily correct. Ideally, though, from a credible news source, those things are going to be updated and corrected as new information comes in. And it's funny that you mentioned 911, because, I mean, I remember it like it was yesterday, like many people, and one of the things I paid particular attention to, especially because I taught media classes was the information that we were being given. And even being shown on TV and having things repeated over and over and over again to the point where it was oversaturation. And we kind of didn't know what was true and what was not true. But with misinformation, and it's interesting, because like National Public Radio has a guideline out there for breaking news. And when something big happens, whether it's a horrible school shooting, or tornado, or a big political event, the media will get things wrong, because they can only give us what they know. And even if they have fact checked it, they are the facts at that time. But those change the number of victims, you know who's to blame or exactly what happened. And a reliable media source is going to say, we have new information and everything needs to be updated now. And then as a consumer, if you are news literate, what you are doing then is you are taking that information and saying, Okay, if I have opinions about this, I need to base that opinion on the new facts, the correct information, not what I first heard, disinformation to me, it's all about matter of intention. Disinformation is a media outlet saying we're going to say that this was the correct information. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not to our best ability, we think it's true. Therefore, we're going to put this out there. And it usually impacts them, maybe their bottom line, maybe they're advertisers, their ratings, and they're doing it with a particular agenda in mind. So that's where
we get into the concept of bias. And I think in today's media landscape, maybe bias is well, first of all, I think bias is kind of like what pays the bills for a lot of media outlets, because they tend to be focused on trying to work within an audience that they know exists. But I don't think that most of the major media outlets, and I would include the ones that are typically assumed to be on one end of the political spectrum or the other. I think that the process of journalism, in the news broadcasts is probably fairly professional and doesn't have a lot of disinformation. But interspersed in all these is opinion. And I wonder if you could talk a little bit about how the line between opinion and news reporting has been blurred? More maybe than it used to be or maybe going back 100 200 years ago, the way it really used to be when we first started to have mass media.
Yeah, well, you know, kind of a little history media history lesson here, you go back to before the Revolutionary War, and newspapers existed. They were mostly advertisements for farms for runaway slaves for property and so forth. But Benjamin Franklin and others soon realized, wait a second, we can as fairly wealthy white men, we can take these presses and include our opinion and propaganda in these newspapers in order to persuade people to fight in the revolution, you know, for freedom from Britain or to not. Right, so both sides of the issues. So, yes, forever. The media has been used to put forth some sort of an agenda. Right. But in terms of the Blurred Lines in this is my opinion, but I think there's a lot of research out there to back it up, is that it's the internet now. Because Gone are the days when we are getting our information in a single kind of linear line. Meaning, you know, when I was young, you read a newspaper, you listen to the radio, you watched TV, there was no interaction. I could voiced my opinions, or my parents could voice their opinions down at the local coffee shop. But that's as far as it went. Now, we are not only media consumers, we are media creators, every person with a social media account with a blog, who comments on somebody else's social media comment, we are now media creators. And we are putting our opinions out there. And we have influencers, you ask many, many students, and one of their favorite things to do is watch their favorite YouTubers, who they consider influencers, meaning they influence their audience as to what product to buy, or what to listen to, or whatever the case might be. And it's mostly their opinion, but they see them as credible sources. Because I like them. I'm familiar with them, I trust them in a way. So if they're telling me that maybe I should support this person in a race or vote for this particular person, I am going to maybe follow that advice. And so that's that blurred line between a professional journalists who practice rigor, who follow a code of journalistic ethics, and someone who's offering opinion
when we get into disinformation as well. So there might be an opinion piece that would start out that either somebody might do this with a rant on YouTube, or they might make a funny tick tock about it, or you can be some person that works just off Time Square, and a huge building that writes up an opinion piece that says this thing happened. And then this is why I think that this is the problem, and that this thing happened is a fact, for instance, you know, a terrible school shooting or something like that. And then the rest of the opinion piece might be, and it's all because of my political opponent, or the people that have a different ideology, the media, different thought it's all their fault. So it starts out with the fact and then gets into this opinion, that is not it's just an opinion, might be based by supporting points, but it's still just an opinion, how do you separate the idea of inter mingling the things that are facts from the things that are opinion,
we talk about this in my in my media classes, and then I talk about this in the news literacy class through continuing education as well. And let me start by saying that doing all of this can feel exhausting, mainly because it is because everything falls onto our shoulders, to recognize whether something is real, and separating those lines between a fifth opinion and fact. But we do have to do our homework if we want to make sure that we are getting correct information. And one of the things you can do is if you are an avid news watcher, so if you've got that 24 hour cable television on all the time, is understanding who's talking, and what their role is in those interviews, and the people giving the news. So you've got your reporters, you've got your journalists who are in front of the camera, they're reading the news, they're asking the questions. Okay, who are they asking questions of, and a lot of times you have commentators who are usually people who have knowledge on the topic, but who are taking an issue, and they're commenting on it based on their expertise, but you also have people coming in with their opinion. And you need to know who's saying what. So you know, if you're watching, again, cable news, one person is interviewing four people at the same time you see them in all of those little squares. And each of them has a different role. One of them might be another reporter who was assigned to that sort of beat that is covering that topic. But one might be a commentator, one might be a politician, who's on there, basically to pontificate towards, you know, whatever they believe in. So even just educating yourself on who has what role in the media, who's physically telling you this information, and why are they telling you, and knowing that is a great way to kind of understand the difference between opinion.
Well, so another thing that is particularly complicated nowadays is I mentioned somebody might be saying something that is a fact and they support it with opinion. But even at dispute nowadays, there are actual facts that people say are facts, that they're not facts. How do you start to vet that? Now, the one thing I think that may be what gets beat up a lot in these discussions, maybe a little bit by us today, and by many folks that want you to not trust one part of media or another is, you know, it's all the media's fault. But really, what as far as journalism goes, there is a process and a tiered sense of, it's not just one person going out and they can't make up a bunch of things and get away with it for very long. It's happened from time to time, but usually it comes around where then that person is discredited. So when it comes to a bunch of things that you see people say and then repeat and then people repeat The thing that they heard somebody else repeat, how do you start figuring out what is a fact? And what is not a fact?
It's funny I, in my notes I had put down that Daniel Patrick Moynihan, he was a former senator from New York said, Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but not their own facts. Meaning I can have my opinion about facts that are out there. But that does not make them facts. In the public speaking class that I teach, we go over persuasion. And we talk about if you're giving a persuasive speech, you can start it with your opinions. But it all has to be backed up with facts, otherwise, it is kind of just your opinion. And I would say to figure out what's real, what's not, is you do need to think about one, where are you getting your information, kind of take a quick inventory of throughout my day, because we are bombarded with messages everywhere we turn throughout my day, who is giving me the information? Who am I listening to? And who am I kind of reacting to? So I might get up in the morning and listen to a radio news program. And I might form opinions based on that. But then later, I might be standing around the watercooler and talking to people there. And then is my opinion then changing because of those people that I'm talking to? And then later if I watch the evening news, is it changing again, so one taken inventory of what messages you are receiving, who are you receiving from, and then whether they are credible or not. But there is a more educational, I guess, easy kind of checklist of things to do. It's called the CRAP test. It is the same test that we tell students to use when they're judging the reliability of a source that they might bring into a speech or a research paper. And it's crap with two A's in it. So in it, you're talking about the currency, or is it? Is it timely? Are we talking about something that is happening very recently, or now? Or is something being dredged up from the past? And while the sudden we're thinking that this is happening right now? What is the relevance? We're hearing about something? Is this really an important thing for people to know? Does it have impact or relevance on their lives? Who is the authority? Who is the source behind it? Kind of that goes back to knowing who you're listening to who you are reading? If you've got the online version of The New York Times open? On the left three quarters of the page, that's their news. But all across the right, that's all their opinions? And you need to know which is which? And also, authority source might also mean who owns that media outlet? Or who? Who is this person representing? Are they just representing themselves? And claiming to be an expert that's different than a media outlet? Having rigorous newsworthy items? I can still separate them from who owns them, some of the time, accuracy? Is it reliable? Is it truth? Do your homework, look at other places, read other news articles, see if they are reporting the same thing? And then purpose? What is the purpose behind this? Why does this information exist? And why does this media outlet or this person think that this is important
when it comes to some things that might be in more of the realm of disinformation, which this gets even more complicated when we think about some of the controversies over social media outlets, especially when it came to the fact that there is concerns that now somebody else can be a bit of a newsmaker by just commenting on some social posts or sharing them. And then we have technology that allows fake dummy accounts to be created to share certain things. And it's just a numbers game to try to beat the algorithm. And so how do you then if you see something, what's the best way to go and cross check it to see if somebody's wild claim is based in any way on a real incident?
From the big picture, you can check kind of on that media source by going to their educational sites, library sites, you can even go to sites like the League of Women and voters, these are nonpartisan websites that can give you graphs, basically, where they outline, okay, if you're getting your news from these media outlets, they're fairly unbiased. They don't lean left or lean right, you go over here to the left, here's a list of the left leaning media outlets. And here's a list of the right. So again, kind of taking inventory. And once you have that list of okay, who are the credible news sources, then to me, that's where you go for I'm hearing something here in Bloomington Normal, and I'm seeing it on social media in certain areas. Usually what I'm going to do is I'm going to go to let's say WG LTS website and say, Okay, well, why did they have, I'm going to look at the pantograph What are they saying about this? And Unfortunately, we don't have too many media outlets in Bloomington Normal very to money anymore. But I go to the ones that I trust and say, are they reporting on this? And if so, what are they saying about it?
Yeah, I think that's another factor as well, that maybe gets into some of the concern about the blending of the type of news one hears is, compared to 2530 years ago, there are just far fewer local media outlets, just the business has been changed and altered by the availability of news on the Internet. So where you might have had two newspapers in a town before now there's only one or none, or you may have had more television coverage of a media market, but then consolidation has made it so they're covering a much wider period of time. So instead of getting one Bloomington Normal story out of the local TV, where you know, you might only get one every other day, or where you used to get five, you only get one. So that's something else that makes it particularly difficult when you're trying to get good information, because there's less actual reporting, it seems so
there is and so you have fewer viewpoints coming in. And I don't mean opinion, viewpoints, but one TV station and their news team is going to look at a story from a different angle than another TV station and news team. And in this area. Now, our television stations, we are down to basically, we have four network affiliates, but we're down to two stations. So four of those have basically two sets of newsrooms these days. And so all of a sudden, how newsrooms would look at a story, what they might cover, what they might uncover who they might interview, that's gone down from four to two. And that limits the information that we are getting about stuff.
I've noticed a trend also, and you see this actually in television. And also you really see it on Internet things. So you have a lot of news aggregators that try to get the news out there. And some people might even be doing what I would call like secondary or third stage reporting. So one news outlet or one media outlet is actually reporting on a story that somebody else reported on, they're just quoting from that story. And to make it new and interesting, and you even see this, when you're watching the TV news, the little placard they put up in the back will have a headline. And if you're not paying attention, and you just just get the headline, some of those headlines can really kind of be misleading, especially in the internet stories, because they really want to get you to click on it. And then you just realize, oh, this is just a read characterization of a story I've already heard. Absolutely. And it seems like sometimes the headlines don't even actually match the story. And it might not be the same people writing them, too.
They often don't, you know, this goes back to magazines, and the blurbs that they would have on them. So you know, so you're checking out at a grocery store. And you see these magazines and these tabloids about all these crazy things, that their goal is to get you inside of the magazine, reading the story, even though it might have really nothing to do with the headline. So part of news literacy is moving past the headline, if nothing else, go to that first paragraph, because a good news story is going to work in what we call an inverted pyramid, or right away at the very beginning. They are supposed to give you the who, what, when, where right of the story. And so right away, you should know if something is credible or not. So always move past the headline, read the article, listen to the whole thing. And in it if one media outlet got it from another, they should be saying that, and most of them do. That's also why we hear you know, so and so we broke the story, because they want people to know where the original
anything else that we'd want to add as people go out about their day try to learn about things head into a cookout with their relatives and the holidays. Want to make sure that they can decide whether or not somebody is just regurgitating some of the misinformation they've heard.
Yep, absolutely. So kind of practice some of the things that we've talked about. It is not hard to find information on News Literacy. Yes, we have an insatiable appetite for immediate information and immediate gratification. But understand that what we are getting from a story right away, might not be accurate. And it needs to be updated regularly. So pay attention to that. Pay attention to who's telling you these things. Because a lot of times we can consume the news, and we might get a little worked up about things. But when Uncle Joe or someone that we don't care for on social media is providing a running commentary on what's happening. That's when we really get excited. And we begin thinking about that more than we do the actual information and we get caught up in that. And the second thing I would recommend is think about how much information you are consuming and consume. Under the fact that information overload can be harmful, and it can cloud our judgment. So I was just talking with a with a colleague about this, you know, with the municipal elections, things like that, it would be easy to just think about it and look what's out there all day long, or with something big that might be happening in the news today, it might be easy to get, you know, glue yourself to the TV or keep refreshing your browser, whatever you've got on, but also realize that maybe you just need to check in every once in a while, get a quick update every once in a while, because the more you consume your brain fatigues after a while, and then you're not necessarily thinking critically about
it. Carla, thanks so much for coming in and talking to us today about news literacy.
Thanks for having me. I appreciate it.
Carla Huffman is a Professor of Communication and new media at Heartland Community College. She spoke to us today about news literacy. If you are interested in other inquiries about news, digital media or other topics, subscribe to random acts of knowledge on Apple podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you found this one. Thanks for listening
