Month: January 2022

Where do we get our daily fix of information and news about the world? 86% of Americans say from a smartphone (Suciu, 2021). Accessing news online has very few barriers for consumers and producers of information. We can access things quickly and with little hassle.

Social media platforms should have rules about the information that is produced on them. They may do. However it would be more than a fulltime job to policy and fact check all of the content. Suciu (2021) also suggests they may not want to; “misinformation gets clicks”. Putting it another way, misinformation engages consumers through emotion and the more shocking the news, the more engagement happens on the platform. Misinformation can come intentionally or unintentionally. For example, some organisations misinform on purpose to create engagement or influence. Recently this has been very common in our current Covid-10 pandemic and vaccination debates. Another way misinformation and fake news can have an effect is how it changes the way people interpret and respond to real news (Shu, Wang, Lee, & Liu, 2020). Their ability to differentiate what is true and what is not is reduced. This is where misinformation becomes dangerous, especially for our youth/students. In information organisations such as schools, it becomes essential for teachers and teacher librarians (TL) to educate students on how to navigate news and make informed decisions about reliability of information.

There are some simple ways to spot misinformation;

– Credibility of the source. Who or where does this information come from? Are they qualified, do they have bias?

-What is the information? Is it recent? Based on facts/science?

-What is the intent? Is it just to share information or are the authors trying to get something in return?

(Suciu, 2021).

A framework for detecting misinformation was utilised by Komendantova, Ekenberg, Svahn, Larsson, Shah, Glinos, Koulias, & Danielson, (2021) in a study on misinformation and how to  recognise it. This framework was much more in depth than the above-mentioned skills. The truth seems to be that as consumers and/or informational professionals, there will always be fake news, misinformation and disinformation. Acknowledgment and an awareness of this is the first step in re-gaining control as a consumer and distinguishing between them.

Kandel (2020) discusses ‘Information disorder’ as sharing or developing false information with or without the intent of harming. The fact that this issue has become one of harm and classified as a syndrome is alarming. Whether organisations are purposely providing disinformation or misinformation, it is obvious that this topic requires more research and guidance for information professionals in terms of education programs for our youth to provide them with critical analysis skills in this area.

Students may experience their own personal or school community variety of misinformation in another form such as rumour. We talk about mis/disinformation through social media platforms in relation to news and knowledge. However there exist, for students probably more importantly, personal misinformation. Such as the likes of rumours shared through Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook, Messenger and Tik-Tok. Providing our students with the understanding that misinformation is out there everywhere, allows them the opportunity to sift through social media whether it be for news, schoolwork, or social interactions and critically analyse the source for truthfulness.

“infodemic” is another newly developed term by the World Health Organization (WHO) in reflection of misinformation, the Covid-19 pandemic and misperceptions (World Health Organization, 2020, Yan, 2021). As this is a world-wide current situation the relevance of the effects of social media and misinformation surrounding this topic is extremely well researched. The negative effects have been made very clear through the amount of the population having developed conspiracy theories, the divide between believers and non-believers of not just the virus but vaccinations and government policies. The detrimental effects can be costly, fatal even. Misinformation has equated to negligence in prevention and protection of the human race (Yan, 20210).

There remains the issue of moral, ethical and legal issues surrounding misinformation in online social media environments. This issue is not going away. There must be a better solution for platforms to manage the dissemination of materials.

It is not just enough to explore and explain misinformation and social media. We know it’s out there. There has been conferences titled “Libraries in a post-truth world” (Phillips Academy, Andova as cited in Sullivan, 2019 p1146) The importance is in understanding the dangers of it and what it does to individuals and communities (Sullivan, 2019). More personally, what I can do in my role as an information professional. Sullivan suggests that Librarians and information specialists don’t have a full understanding of the dangers of misinformation and therefor aren’t able to join the fight against it. This could be due to the constantly changing online environment in which nobody seems to be able to keep up with. Combined with the lack of literature that combines misinformation and social media. I do not completely agree with this assumption. Information organisations are places of leadership. Professionals in this field are trained to lead and to keep a step ahead. I do believe the issues of mis/disinformation will always exist. I believe it is our role to continue exploring these current issues and ensuring we are education others on how to develop their own critical skills in analysis. Some practical steps could be simply to provide online seminars/lessons to evaluate sources, provide video tutorials.

As an information professional I am an ally against misinformation in any form be it, paper, online news, social media.

References

Kandel, M. (2020). Information Disorder Syndrome and its Management. Journal of Nepal Medical Association, 5(224). 280-285. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7580464/

Komendantova,

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-020-00702-9#Abs1

Shu, K., Wang, S., Lee, D., & Liu, H. (2020). Disinformation, Misinformation, and Fake News in Social Media. Emerging Research Challenges and Opportunities. https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/book/10.1007%2F978-3-030-42699-6

Suciu, P. (2021). Spotting Misinformation on Social Media is Increasingly Challenging. Forbes Magazine. August 2. https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2022/01/28/nfts-unblocked-seed-round-tiger-global-dapper-labs-jay-z-marcy-ventures/?sh=c5ba594e699b

Yan, S. It doesn’t take a village to fall for misinformation: Social media use, discussion heterogeneity preference, worry of the virus, faith in scientists, and Covid-19- related misinformation beliefs. Telematics and informatics 5(58), 101547

https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/science/article/pii/S0736585320302069?via%3Dihub

READ THIS…….

The Little Robot that Lived at the Library;

https://towardsdatascience.com/the-little-robot-that-lived-at-the-library-90431f34ae2c

Thank you Minja Axelsson! The Oodi Library in Helsinki that built an emotive robot library assistant. I want one.

The potential for the future of school libraries is immense. There are many ways in which we talk about integrating technologies into our teaching within the school library setting. Educating students about technologies, online environments, research skills, cyber safety etc. This is all essential and we are doing a great job of it. Keeping up with changes and giving our students the skills they might need for their futures in jobs that don’t even exist as yet. However, the reality of a teacher librarians’ (TL) role such as mine, is that 50% of my time is taken up with monotonous tasks such as re-shelfing, staking, covering, labelling and often a lot of foot work to retrieve things for people. What about allowing librarians to use their time for better use by having a robot do the menial tasks? The possibilities of having automated machine/robotics for certain tasks is so exciting in terms of the time this can free up for a TL.

I further researched robots in libraries to find out more about these wonderful creatures. There are about 10 libraries in Australia that use humanoid robots. Nguyen (2020) identified 4 themes in robot interaction in libraries through her study. Her analysis revealed in the studied settings that robots are considered as community builders, teachers, aids, and challengers. What a benefit for librarians and library users. It leaves the question; how else could they do support us? What else could they do? I am not an IT master or robot builder yet. However, could they also become storytellers? Help facilitate delivery of programs?

Personally there is no fear in ‘robots coming’ to take our jobs. More the better, I see this as something that compliments a librarian and attracts patrons.

There will always be need for human interaction. Robots are many things however, they don’t have human intelligence; experience, values, judgment.

Robots and machines have been present in many other industries for a long time. I feel excited about the opportunities that robots and other technologies can bring forth in the library and school library settings. We cannot fight progression but rather embrace it.

References

Axelsson, M. (2019). The Little Robot that Lived at the Library {Blog post}. https://towardsdatascience.com/the-little-robot-that-lived-at-the-library-90431f34ae2c

Nguyen, L, C. (2020). The Impact of Humanoid Robots on Australian Public Libraries. Journal of the Australian Library & Information Association, 69(2). 130-148.

https://web-p-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/ehost/results?vid=0&sid=8db50eae-33ee-4238-9384-af5c32e7e539%40redis&bquery=%28SO%2B%28Journal%2Bof%2Bthe%2BAustralian%2BLibrary%2Band%2BInformation%2BAssociation.%29%29AND%28DT%2B2020%29AND%28TI%2Bthe%2Bimpact%2Bof%2Bhumanoid%2Brobots%2Bon%2Baustralian%2Bpublic%2Blibraries%29&bdata=JmRiPWEyaCZ0eXBlPTEmc2VhcmNoTW9kZT1BbmQmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl

The term ‘Digital native’. Was first introduced to me in 2005 when I was first studying my teacher’s degree. This stuck with me for years as a perfect name for the upcoming generation of children and adolescence that were growing alongside the development of new technologies. Since becoming a mother myself and now a teacher of children aged 5-18 I question the accuracy of it. It does not seem to be inherent that they have digital knowlge naturally. Hernandez-Martin, Martin-del-Pozo, & Iglesias-Rodruguez (2021) reinforced my thinking through their study on Pre-adolescent digital competencies in the area of safety specifically. The target population of pre-adolescence for their study is integral. Our younger generation of technology and online users must have the knowledge and skills surrounding safe use. As an information professional it is our moral responsibility as well as our job to asses and teach them these competencies. Our children must learn from us how to navigate the challenges of analysing and questioning information for truthfulness. “Mum, I learnt something from YouTube today! Did you know…….” This is a conversation I have with my child at least once a day. 9 times out of 10 the story is no-where near the truth.

A study on Fake news done by Rampersad & Althiyabi (2020) finds that it is age that has an influence on the acceptance of fake news. Fake news is literally intentional lies told by somebody to use emotion to coerce another into believing something. The study looked at age, gender, education and culture and the acceptance of fake news. It does focus on political news, However the message is the same, that age is the major factor in belief. Younger people generally react more on emotion, and this is exactly what fake news uses as a driver for influence.

As a mother I am reminded by my sons’ ‘new found information on youtube’ of the dangers of fake-news and online safety. As in information professional it is my responsibility to educate my students to the best of my ability of the digital competencies.

References

Hernandez-Martin, A., Martin-del-Pozo, M., & Iglesias-Rodriguez, A. (2021). Pre-adolescents’ digital competencies in the area of safety. Does frequency of social media use mean safer and more knowledgeable digital usage? Education and Information Technologies, 26(1), 1043-1067.  https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/article/10.1007%2Fs10639-020-10302-4

Rampersad, G., & Althiyabi, T. (2020). Fake news: Acceptance by demographics and culture on social media. Journal of Information & Politics, 17(1), 1-11. https://www-tandfonline-com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/doi/full/10.1080/19331681.2019.1686676