Conference Summary
This summary outlines a one-day programme of presentations made at This Is Not A Fake Conference: How Librarians & Information Professionals Tackle Fake News, which took place on 5 June 2018 at London South Bank University (LSBU). The conference was organised by information skills advisors Alison Skoyles, Marian Brown, Erin Bloxsidge and Kathy Neville. The event brought together approximately sixty attendees, mostly HE librarians, with some FE, school and public library staff and academics also attending. The keynote speaker was Rita Marcella, Professor of Information Management at Robert Gordon University. The conference began with an examination of the phenomenon of fake news and continued with a showcase of information literacy projects developed to encourage greater critical engagement. Following an exploration of the role of satire the conference concluded with a review of LSBU’s HEAR accredited information skills workshops.
Session 1: The Good News About Fake News: It’s a Far Bigger Problem Than You Thought!
Adam Blackwell, Product Manager Lead for Proquest, started the morning with an exploration of the nature of fake news. While the challenge of assessing the credibility of information is not new, the term “fake news” has appeared only recently, around the time of the US presidential election. Several definitions of fake news were presented, including that of the Collins English Dictionary (2018), which describes it as “false, often sensational, information disseminated under the guise of news reporting”. In Blackwell’s view, the originators of fake news demonstrate little interest in either accurate reporting or their long term reputation.
Blackwell cited John Lott’s book, More Guns, Less Crime, as an example of academic fraud which, though published by Chicago University Press, was found to have fabricated articles, data and reviews. Blackwell observed that this case demonstrated why the task of evaluation cannot be outsourced to others. In asking how academics could have been taken in by such a book, Blackwell concluded it was because people wanted to believe it. In summarising this concept of confirmation bias, Blackwell quoted Sir Francis Bacon, “The human understanding, once it has adopted opinions, either because they were already accepted and believed, or because it likes them, draws everything else to support and agree with them” (1620 cited by Collins 2008).
Blackwell explored other examples of fake news, including Jonathan Streeter’s Mormon apology for racism and the Pope’s endorsement of Trump. In both examples the reports were believed by those who wanted to believe them. Fake news is less likely to be believed by those who do not wish to believe it. Blackwell concluded with an analogy that fake news is like refined sugar, providing an artificially simplistic view of the world - something we crave - while real news, more like an apple, is generally messier and harder to digest.
Session 2: Critical Approaches To Sourcing Information On The Web And Fake News
Carol Hollier, Senior Librarian at the University of Nottingham, provided an overview of a web evaluation session offered to undergraduates, called “Critical Approaches to Sourcing Information on the Web”. Run for the past three years, the topical fifty minute session is discipline specific and tied to current assignments. The issue of fake news began to be addressed in the autumn of 2016, following its appearance in the US presidential elections. The session was then redeveloped for 2017/18 in order to embed the issue more deeply.
Satire, parody and error are all discussed within the session. Staff also explain how the Internet works, looking at some of the mechanisms used by search engines and social media which contribute to the circulation of fake information. This includes filter bubbles created by search engine algorithms as well as self-imposed bubbles created by social media. The “muddled web” is discussed, in terms of false and misleading information appearing alongside high quality material, leading onto discussion of fake news.
Ways of “popping the bubble” are considered, with comparisons being made between different search engines, for example Google v. DuckDuckGo, which protects searchers’ privacy and avoids filter bubbles created through personalised search results. This leads onto teaching on advanced search techniques.
Students are introduced to criteria for evaluating sources and are encouraged to approach research with an attitude of critical reflection. The previously used RADAR evaluation framework has now been superseded by the fact checkers approach, which emphasises lateral thinking rather than check lists (Wineburg and McGrew 2017). See Appendix 1, Evaluation Methods, for details.
The workshop includes a mix of activities, with students comparing two websites, in addition to the staff demos delivered from the front. Slick examples are deliberately chosen, where the fake is not easy to spot. “Scholarly” information on the web is then considered, during which a questionable Google Scholar article is reviewed, and found to be an early draft, non-peer reviewed item. Further investigation reveals that the lax research within it was supported by Google and clearly not unbiased. The article is therefore revealed to be less credible than initially supposed.
In concluding, Carol Hollier noted that students now seem to be more aware of the need to evaluate their sources than previously. She stressed the importance of students having a balanced scepticism about what they find on the Internet, as extremely unreliable information circulates side by side with high quality information. It is hoped that the critical approaches taught in the web evaluation session will introduce students to key research skills which they can use to assess the validity of what they find online. Looking to the future, the Teaching & Learning Support Team are looking to develop e-learning around this.
Session 3: New Research Needs to Be Better Reported and Librarians Can Help With That
Andy Tattersall, Information Specialist at the University of Sheffield, outlined problems with the current reporting of new research, and suggested some solutions. While scientific research is receiving more attention in the media, journalists aren’t necessarily aware of the research process or of Open Access.1 The pressure to sell papers and the practice of recycling news stories (churnalism) can both lead to the spread of misinformation and fake news. While academics are not in control of interviews with the media, important information may not get shared. Providing detailed factual information in press releases is vital in order for links to be followed later down the media line. Without these links, altmetrics2, important for measuring academic impact, are lost.
It was suggested that publishing information about who carried out the research, which institutions they worked with, who funded the research, what the research was, and where it can be accessed, would assist reporting. If the media links directly to research, the wider coverage can lead to research having a greater impact. It can also form part of impact case studies used for REF3 assessment, and enable interested parties to read the research for themselves.
Tattersall appealed to librarians to encourage academics to make their output Open Access, and to communicate this to media and social media, so others can access publicly available versions of the work. He also recommended the promotion of tools such as the Open Access Button and Unpaywall4, as well as registering with ORCID5. Where academics have reservations about engaging with social media, librarians could offer training in its safe use. Librarians could also actively promote resources that tackle fake news, for example Behind the Headlines, Sense About Science, and The Conversation.
Session 4: Developing Fake News Ninjas
Lorna Smith, Assistant Liaison Librarian at Newcastle University, shared how the liaison team has been tackling fake news since 2017. Having created a Fake News themed subject guide and libguide, staff now also deliver a taught library module. An online video of the TED talk, How False News Can Spread (Tavlin & Smith 2015), is widely used. The critical evaluation resource on Blackboard now also includes a section on fake news. They have found that students are more likely to engage with social media push outs, rather than lunch time drop-ins, for which there has historically been little take up. Social media such as Instagram, Twitter and the library blog are all used, and cover topics such as the history of fake news and how to spot it. In future they would like to develop this further, in order to embed it in online learning, as well as using it in face-to-face teaching. They also plan to make the fake news promotion an annual event and to develop a quiz. The team intend to target academics as well as students.
Session 5: Information Behaviour in the Context of Political Decision Making: Fake News and ‘Alternative Facts’
Rita Marcella, Professor of Information Management at Robert Gordon University, reviewed research being undertaken into fake news, fact response, fact checking and the journey of the fact. Marcella noted that the information landscape has undergone significant changes over the thirty years she has been a researcher. Use of the term “post-truth”, introduced in the 1990s, escalated around the time of the Brexit debate and US presidential elections in 2016. Since then the terms “fake news” and “alternative facts” have both become widely used. Marcella emphasised that the issue of ‘fake news’ is fundamentally about information behaviour and literacy.
Individual examples of research were identified in the fields of economics, media studies, communications, computer science and health, indicating the breadth of the issue across disciplines. Several more examples of library and information studies (LIS) research were also given, featuring work by Bluemle, Burkhardt, Lamb, Rochlin and Spratt & Agosto. Katz classic volume on reference work was highlighted as an authority on information searching for LIS professionals.
Marcella noted that it is during referendums that voters have the greatest need for information. This need is tied to a desire for assurance that the right decision is being made. During the Scottish and EU referendums, voters wanted “the facts” – simple, neat facts – which simply don’t exist. Marcella & Baxter’s 2014 study in voters’ online information behaviour revealed that respondents were sceptical about information presented as “the facts” or “the truth”, with some acknowledgement of the likelihood of bias. Respondents in the study also expressed the need for more information about the source of statistics, with only 37% thinking it was reliable. Respondents showed some uncertainty about their own ability to evaluate information.
Marcella & Baxter identified five types of searchers: the indifferent searcher, reactive searcher, haphazard searcher, proactive searcher and the engaged searcher. The majority of the respondents in the study were classified as either haphazard or reactive in how they sought for information. It was noted that people’s search behaviour will vary depending on how interested they are in the subject.
When asked to identify examples of fake news they had encountered, interviewees responded with Iraq and the weapons of mass destruction, the Brexit bus and the US presidential campaign. Researchers also explored how political facts get changed and used. Respondents were presented with visual examples of campaign materials containing “facts” and statistics. When asked, very few respondents admitted to having been misled by a political “fact”, although some confessed to having been taken in by food labelling, endowment policies and April fools jokes in the media. The study demonstrated that respondents often accept or reject a fact within seconds, before applying any evaluation criteria to it.
Marcella concluded with observing that at a time when information has never been more important, libraries are nevertheless experiencing severe cuts in funding.
Session 6: The Charlotte Project – Engaging Youth on Fake News
Peter Keep, Founder of The Charlotte Project, and Robin Pomeroy, editor and journalist, introduced The Charlotte Project, set up in 2017 in memory of Charlotte Cooper, a Reuters journalist. The foundation offers one hour interactive workshops and train-the-trainer events. Their aim is to provide 15-18 year olds with tools to navigate the news, stay safe online, avoid extremism, engage with reporters and inspire the journalists of tomorrow. By the end of the workshop, it is hoped that young people will feel more confident about spotting and dealing with fake news. Although they may not be able to control fake news, they can still choose how to react to it. (See Appendix 2 for a more detailed outline of the workshop activities.)
Session 7: Information Literacy, the Cure for Fake News: Making Connections at the University of Bedfordshire
Gwen Kent, Academic Liaison Librarian at the University of Bedfordshire, outlined activities undertaken as part of a fake news campaign and emphasised how the issue presents an opportunity for information professionals to demonstrate their relevance. The campaign was designed to tie in with the institution’s strategic plan of broadening understanding and producing politically engaged, informed, empowered, and responsible citizens. The development of general information literacy source evaluation skills closely supports these objectives. Addressing fake news issues of post-truth politics and echo chambers/filter bubbles on social media provides opportunities for engaging students in understanding the importance of information literacy, not only in their academic work, but also in their political and social lives as well.
The campaign included book displays on fake news and resource evaluation, details of which were posted on the library blog. Posters were displayed showing true and false information, which students could lift to reveal which were correct. The term “fake news” was dropped into web marketing materials to drip feed students, for example “How can you apply your skills to fight fake news?” They also produced a web page guide and a PDF guide (also made available in hardcopy), along with a newsletter for academic staff about what the library could offer. A workshop of one and a half hours was delivered to journalism students, exploring fact checking sites, how statistics can be skewed, how fake news spreads through echo chambers and filter bubbles, and how it can be countered.
Session 8: #FakeNewsFriday and Other Information Literacy Tales from the Open University Library
Amanda Closier and Ute Manecke, Learning and Teaching Librarians with the Open University, demonstrated how Facebook’s live chat facility was used to broadcast a series of five minute Q&A videos in the run up to the UK General Election in June 2017. Each broadcast covered two aspects of the IFLA infographic How to Spot Fake News.
Session 9: Developing the Research Skills of Students Studying for Their EPQ (Extended Project Qualification)
Carol Price, Mandy Goode and Janice Wright, Librarians at Birmingham City University, shared their experience of supporting sixth form students studying for their EPQ (similar to General Studies). In addition to a full activity day, the following three sessions are offered to schools. Getting to Know an Academic Library – covers what resources and services the library offers and how it is organised. To Google or Not to Google – covers strategies and search tips for improving research. Trash or Treasure – applies critical evaluation skills to identify what information can safely be used for research purposes. The session considers examples of fake news and how they have developed. Students are invited to use their mobiles to show examples they have encountered. Voting technologies are also used to get students to identify whether the examples are fake or not. The session looks at how you can tell the difference between what is real and what is fake, and recommends fact checking sites and resources such as Factitious. Students are asked to write their own evaluation criteria, which are then compared to the IFLA guide. Online support and activities are also available for these students via the university’s external Xoodle pages, available at: http://xoodle.bcu.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=203. A pilot scheme for student mentoring has also been introduced as part of the Graduate+ award, to support less confident students. An employer research session is also offered to current students, entitled How to Impress Your Employer, which now includes fake news as well. There was a much higher take up of this employability workshop than is usual for library workshops.
Session 10: From Personal Engagement to Public Engagement
Cambridge University Research Support Librarian Georgina Cronin and Open Access Research Adviser Katie Hughes reviewed their experience of delivering a ninety minute public engagement workshop at the university’s Festival of Ideas event in 2017. The interactive session began with one of the presenters telling a lie about themselves during their introduction, after which the audience were asked to guess who it was. Definitions of fake news from both the Collins and Urban dictionaries were explored, with the latter providing more comprehensive coverage. The history of fake news was outlined, and attendees were introduced to the concept of confirmation bias, believing because you want to. Participants were then invited to take part in a quiz exploring how they approach news and what channels (sources) they use. Other activities included analysing how trustworthy the tweets were in a particular Twitter feed, and which newspapers a selection of headlines came from.
Breitbart, the American far-right opinion site, was highlighted as an example of a biased source. The workshop then proceeded to explore ways to verify information and challenge bias. A range of fact checking tools were identified, including SciCheck, Wayback Machine, Google Reverse Image search, FotoForensics and Snopes. The effects of filter bubbles were shown by displaying screenshots showing the difference in results of a Google search conducted on a personal PC and a work PC. Tips were then given on how to escape this type of filter bubble. The session ended with an active listening exercise intended to emphasise the importance of listening as an aid to effective discussion and debate.
Session 11: Teaching Activities for Business News and Fake News Information Literacy
Kay Griffiths, Senior Library Assistant at Imperial College London, outlined activities used to engage postgraduate Business students in critical thinking as part of the university’s strategic objectives. The session included class discussion and evaluation of the content, bias and authority of a range of online news sources including the FT, Forbes and CNBC. The features of fake news and the role of social media, filter bubbles and echo chambers were discussed in the context of business information. AB Tutor software was used to facilitate class screen sharing for computer based activities. These included comparisons between news search results via Google and the newspaper database Factiva. Following on from the Google quick search, Scholar was then used to focus search results, for example for PDFs. As part of the session students were introduced to PROMPT criteria as an evaluation tool. Student engagement is improved when the session is aligned with topics and projects they are currently working on.
Session 12: Beyond Source Evaluation: Using Political Satire to Address Fake News
Sebastian Krutkowski, Academic Achievement Librarian at the University of Roehampton shared how political satire can be used to address the issue of fake news. He observed that humour can improve the learning environment by creating a more relaxed atmosphere, building rapport, and making learning more memorable and fun, especially for students who are disengaged. He acknowledged that the success of any humour depends on it being recognised, so choosing relevant examples is essential. Political satire can be used to expose the way individuals, particularly politicians, can manipulate facts. It can also be used to challenge traditional news reports, fake news disinformation and social media bubbles. Late night comedy programmes like Last Week Tonight with John Oliver and Late Night with Seth Meyers can encourage viewers to think more critically. These shows are both well researched, with the former having successfully defeated legal action because of the thoroughness of the research. Creative tools such as Mozilla’s X-Ray Goggles, and Fake News Generator provide opportunities to create your own examples of satire and fake news. Edpuzzle was also recommended for adding narration and quizzes to video clips, to develop lesson resources for students.
Session 13: HEAR-Badged Fake News Workshops & Working with Journalism Students
Alison Skoyles and Kathy Neville, Information Skills Advisors at London South Bank University, concluded the day’s presentations with an overview of their own response to the fake news issue. A programme of three workshops were developed to draw attention to the issue and to develop evaluation skills and encourage fact checking. These sessions were Higher Education Achievement Report (HEAR) accredited, providing a link to employability skills.
The first session covered the history of fake news and the effects of filter bubbles, echo chambers and confirmation bias. As part of this session students were required to produce an online poster explaining one of these terms. The second session introduced students to the CRAAP method for evaluating online sources, during which students were required to evaluate a range of articles on a given topic. The final session explored the history of fact checking and introduced students to a range of online services such as Snopes and included a Mentimeter quiz to test if examples were true or false. To complete the programme, students were required to write a 500 word essay reflecting on the sessions and how they would apply what they had learnt. In separate initiatives, staff worked in collaboration with Journalism students to create a news panel show on the topic of fake news, before arranging the current conference in order to explore how other institutions have been responding to the issue.
Application
Fake news is already touched upon indirectly in our Web Evaluation session, during which we flag up examples of false quotes from Taylor Swift. We can certainly start to refer more directly to fake news in other sessions as well, such as the databases session, and referencing session. We can place added emphasis on the importance of source checking and fact checking, as part of source evaluation criteria. This will also feed into the referencing session, highlighting the value of being able to trace sources. Enquiries could be made into the possibility of arranging a visit by The Charlotte Project, depending on cost. We could also approach Advice & Guidance to investigate whether the College has any kind of employability award, and whether we could contribute to it.
______________________________________________________________________
1 Open Access – publishing the product of research in open-access electronic archives, or via open-access journals which don’t receive income from reader subscriptions (Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) 2017).
2 Altmetrics – data measuring how research and scholarship is accessed, used, and shared online. These “alternative metrics” provide another way in which to measure an academic’s impact, in addition to the traditional method of measuring citations (University of Pittsburgh, 2018).
3 REF – Research Excellence Framework, assessment undertaken by the four UK higher education funding bodies to ensure accountability, benchmarking and selective funding (Research Excellence Framework 2017).
4 Unpaywall harvests Open Access research, providing a database of 17 million free scholarly articles (Unpaywall 2018).
5 ORCID provides unique digital identifiers for academics, enabling connections to be made between them and their work, thereby ensuring their work is recognised (ORCID 2018).
References
Allcott, H. and Gentzkow, M., 2017. Social media and fake news in the 2016 election [online]. Journal of economic perspectives, 31 (2), 2011-236.
Bluemle, S.R., 2018. Post-Facts: Information Literacy and Authority after the 2016 Election. Libraries and the Academy [online], 18 (2), 265-282.
Burkhardt, J.M., 2017. Combatting fake news in the digital age [online]. Library technology reports [online], 53 (8).
Collins English Dictionary, 2018. Fake news [online]. Glasgow: HarperCollins. Available from: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/fake-news [Accessed 6 June 2018].
Collins, P.M., 2008. Friends of the Supreme Court: interest groups and judicial decision-making [online]. New York: Oxford University Press.
Higher Education Funding Council for England, 2017. Open access research [online]. Bristol: Higher Education Funding Council for England. Available from: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/rsrch/oa/whatis/ [Accessed 13 June 2018].
IFLA, 2018. How to Spot Fake News [online]. The Hague: IFLA. Available from: https://www.ifla.org/publications/node/11174 [Accessed 22 June 2018].
Katz, W.A., 1987. Introduction to reference work: volume 1: basic information sources. 5th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lamb, A., 2017. Fact or fake? Curriculum challenges for school librarians. Teacher librarian [online], 45 (1), 56-60,63.
ORCID, 2018. ORCID [online]. Bethesda, MD: ORCID. Available from: https://orcid.org/ [Accessed 14 June 2018].
Research Excellence Framework, 2017. What is the REF? [online]. Research Excellence Framework. Available from: http://www.ref.ac.uk/about/whatref/ [Accessed 13 June 2018].
Rochlin, N., 2017. Fake news: belief in post-truth. Library hi tech [online], 35 (3), 386-392.
Spratt, H.E. and Agosto, D.E., 2017. Fighting fake news: because we all deserve the truth: programming ideas for teaching teens media literacy. Young adult library services [online], 15 (4).
Snopes, ca. 2018. Snopes [online]. Available from: https://www.snopes.com/ [Accessed 22 June 2018].
Tavlin, N. and Smith, P., 2015. How false news can spread [video, online]. YouTube. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSKGa_7XJkg [Accessed 8 June 2018].
University of Pittsburgh, 2018. Altmetrics: what are altmetrics? [online]. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh. Available from: http://pitt.libguides.com/Altmetrics [Accessed 13 June 2018].
Unpaywall, ca.2018. Unpaywall [online]. Available from: https://unpaywall.org/ [Accessed 14 June 2018].
Urban Dictionary, ca. 2018. Fake news [online]. Available from: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fake+news [Accessed 25 June 2018].
Wineburg, S. and McGrew, S., 2017. Lateral reading: reading less and learning more when evaluating digital information [online]. Stanford History Education Group Working Paper, no. 2017-A1. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3048994 [Accessed 26 June 2018].
[CPD 10 hours]
No comments:
Post a Comment