Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Adults may need media literacy even more than students

People reading in a library

Most media literacy programs have been aimed at students, but studies show adults have a harder time distinguishing factual news from opinion news.

Sam Bloomberg-Rissman/Getty Images

The debate over how to fight disinformation in the digital age has divided leading experts and raised thorny questions about free speech and truth on the web.

Should Facebook ban political ads, as Twitter has done, or at least stop exempting politicians from its rules barring misinformation? Should social media platforms ban the "microtargeting" that allows politicians to hand pick narrow audiences while evading public scrutiny? Google recently took steps to limit microtargeting, but political players say that will just cut off small donors and hurt challengers.

Such dilemmas point to what may be the only real solution to the disinformation problem: Educating news consumers. The movement to revive civic learning has focused fresh attention on students' media literacy. But what about their parents and grandparents? Older Americans are even worse than students at distinguishing factual news from opinion news, studies have found, and are more likely to repost fraudulent stories. Yet adults have been largely left out of the push to tackle the "upstream" side of the misinformation explosion — the viewers and readers who make false stories "go viral."

That is starting to change. The News Literacy Project, whose digital Checkology curriculum now reaches educators in every state and in 110 countries, is rolling out today a new tool specifically aimed at both students and adults. The group's new mobile app, Informable, trains users how to sort truth from fiction with games that develop fact-checking and other news literacy skills. The app enables the group to expand "beyond the classroom" to reach the general public, NLP announced Monday.


"Unless we give the public the tools to be more discerning consumers and sharers of news and information, we're not going to be able to address the misinformation pandemic that threatens to undermine the country's civic life and our democracy," said NLP Founder and CEO Alan Miller.

Miller noted that all the tools that NLP offers students are also educational for adults. These include the virtual Checkology classroom; a weekly newsletter, The Sift, that turns the most recent viral rumors, hoaxes and conspiracy theories into timely lessons; and online "Get Smart About the News" quizzes and activities that aim to boost news literacy.

Media industry advocates tackling misinformation in politics, including election interference by Russia and other foreign adversaries, cite news consumers as a critical line of defense. PEN America, which champions freedom of expression for writers, has cautioned tech companies against limiting free expression — though the group opposesFacebook's laissez faire stance on political ads.

"Empowering corporations or government as the leaders in solving this problem risks making them the arbiters of truth," argues a March PEN America report titled "Truth on the Ballot." "Instead, that role must lie with the individual who will make the ultimate decision about what to believe or not believe, what to share or not to share."

PEN America's "News Consumers' Bill of Rights and Responsibilities" spells out obligations for the media industry, such as ethical guidelines and prompt corrections, but argues that viewers and readers have duties, too. These include seeking news from a variety of viewpoints, investigating the source and credibility of information, refraining from reposting or spreading false information, and reporting misinformation to platforms that carry it.

Mainstream news outlets can also help by giving readers a better sense of who they are and how they do their work, as The New York Times has done with its "Understanding the Times" series. Such explainers can help restore trust at a time when Americans are increasingly muddled by the growing gap between mainstream news coverage and the alternate reality occupied by conservative media.

Impeachment proceedings on Capitol Hill have underscored the parallel universe that divides mainstream news organizations and conservative media sites allied with President Trump. For Trump and his GOP defenders on Capitol Hill, muddying the waters and advancing debunked conspiracy theories has emerged as a key impeachment defense. One recent poll found that almost half (47 percent) of Americans say it's difficult to tell whether the information they hear is true or not.

The problem will only worsen as technology becomes more sophisticated, and artificial intelligence makes it increasingly difficult to distinguish real footage from doctored videos, experts predict. In the future, "it will be impossible to distinguish between real and false," warned Nicco Mele, a lecturer in public policy at Harvard's Kennedy School, at a misinformation panel at the Annual Conference on Citizenship in October.

Attempts to tackle misinformation are quickly overwhelmed by the scope of the problem, said Mele, who previously headed the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy. As quickly as policy makers and tech companies come up with solutions, digital innovations hand those peddling falsehoods new workarounds. Ultimately, defending the truth will be up to news consumers, said Mele. "It's the demand side that we have to address, rather than the supply side."

Carney is a contributing writer.


Read More

“We Will Not Let This Destroy Our Sacred Sites”: Indigenous Leaders Fight Trump Administration’s Border Wall

Lorraine Marquez Eiler, a Hia-C’ed O’odham elder, listens as Tohono O'odham Chairman Verlon Jose speaks during a news conference at the Quitobaquito Springs site on Monday, Aug. 24, 2026.

Stephanie Casanova

“We Will Not Let This Destroy Our Sacred Sites”: Indigenous Leaders Fight Trump Administration’s Border Wall

Standing near the pond at Quitobaquito Springs, Lorraine Marquez Eiler, a Hia-Ced O’odham elder, shared how her ancestors held ceremonies at the sacred site — a desert oasis in a national park that the federal government is set to bulldoze for a new border wall.

She pulled out a photo of her great-great grandparents and her great-grandparents, who would walk about 50 miles through the Sonoran Desert to the springs. The O’odham call the water flow A’al Vaipia. She showed the image of her ancestors to a group that included Indigenous leaders and a U.S. congressional representative — all there on Monday to condemn the border wall construction.

Keep ReadingShow less
Typing on a computer
person using laptop

America Needs a Digital Equity Policy, Not Just Tech Innovation

The United States invests billions in artificial intelligence research and development‚ semiconductor fabrication‚ and next-generation connectivity. Yet millions of Americans cannot consistently access the internet or afford the devices needed to submit an online application for social services or a job application․ This is not an oversight․ It is a policy choice that is costing the country dearly․

Connectivity is a floor, not a ceiling:

Keep ReadingShow less
The election voting process, bidding, hands raised up with papers

Confidence in U.S. elections has fallen to 55% ahead of the 2026 midterms. The real risk isn't who wins — it's whether the loser accepts it.

Svetlana Shamshurina/Getty Images

The Real Test of the 2026 Midterms Comes After the Vote

Less than three months before Americans vote in the 2026 midterms, a federal judge on August 11 blocked the U.S. Postal Service from implementing part of President Donald Trump’s executive order tightening mail-in voting rules. The ruling came amid an intensifying fight over how November’s elections will be administered. That fight underscores a deeper problem: the real question in American politics is no longer simply who wins the next election, but whether large numbers of people will still accept the result when their side loses.

Elections in the United States were supposed to settle arguments. One side wins, the other accepts defeat, and the country moves on. That quiet agreement is under growing pressure as the midterms approach. Control of Congress still matters, but beneath that contest lies a more consequential question: if the outcome goes against one of the two major political camps, will that camp still trust the process that declared it the loser?

Keep ReadingShow less
 Unrecognizable doctor prescribing pharmacy to patient.

After a 30-year decline, U.S. abortions are rising again. Texas data suggests bans may shift where abortions happen — not whether they do.

Natalia Gdovskaia/Getty Images

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice: Bridging the Gap

Introduction

We have spent decades arguing about abortion policy on ideological grounds. I think we now have an opportunity to step back, look at what actually happened, and ask a more fundamental question: What policies actually reduce the number of abortions?

I believe that is a question on which pro-life and pro-choice people should be able to agree. Whatever our differences about abortion itself, surely, we can agree that fewer abortions would be a good outcome.

Keep ReadingShow less