Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”:
A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

Liliana Mason

“It’s Probably as Bad as It Can Get”: A Conversation with Lilliana Mason

In the aftermath of the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, the threat of political violence has become a topic of urgent concern in the United States. While public support for political violence remains low—according to Sean Westwood of the Polarization Research Lab, fewer than 2 percent of Americans believe that political murder is acceptable—even isolated incidence of political violence can have a corrosive effect.

According to political scientist Lilliana Mason, political violence amounts to a rejection of democracy. “If a person has used violence to achieve a political goal, then they’ve given up on the democratic process,” says Mason, “Instead, they’re trying to use force to affect government.”

Keep ReadingShow less
We Need To Rethink the Way We Prevent Sexual Violence Against Children

We Need To Rethink the Way We Prevent Sexual Violence Against Children

November 20 marks World Children’s Day, marking the adoption of the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child. While great strides have been made in many areas, we are failing one of the declaration’s key provisions: to “protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse.”

Sexual violence against children is a public health crisis that keeps escalating, thanks in no small part to the internet, with hundreds of millions of children falling victim to online sexual violence annually. Addressing sexual violence against children only once it materializes is not enough, nor does it respect the rights of the child to be protected from violence. We need to reframe the way we think about child protection and start preventing sexual violence against children holistically.

Keep ReadingShow less
People waving US flags

A deep look at what “American values” truly mean, contrasting liberal, conservative, and MAGA interpretations through the lens of the Declaration and Constitution.

LeoPatrizi/Getty Images

What Are American Values?

There are fundamental differences between liberals and conservatives—and certainly MAGA adherents—on what are “American values.”

But for both liberal and conservative pundits, the term connotes something larger than us, grounding, permanent—of lasting meaning. Because the values of people change as the times change, as the culture changes, and as the political temperament changes. The results of current polls are the values of the moment, not "American values."

Keep ReadingShow less
Voting Rights Are Back on Trial...Again

Vote here sign

Caitlin Wilson/AFP via Getty Images

Voting Rights Are Back on Trial...Again

Last month, one of the most consequential cases before the Supreme Court began. Six white Justices, two Black and one Latina took the bench for arguments in Louisiana v. Callais. Addressing a core principle of the Voting Rights Act of 1965: representation. The Court is asked to consider if prohibiting the creation of voting districts that intentionally dilute Black and Brown voting power in turn violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th and 15th Amendments.

For some, it may be difficult to believe that we’re revisiting this question in 2025. But in truth, the path to voting has been complex since the founding of this country; especially when you template race over the ballot box. America has grappled with the voting question since the end of the Civil War. Through amendments, Congress dropped the term “property” when describing millions of Black Americans now freed from their plantation; then later clarified that we were not only human beings but also Americans before realizing the right to vote could not be assumed in this country. Still, nearly a century would pass before President Lyndon B Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 ensuring voting was accessible, free and fair.

Keep ReadingShow less