#Sift

[taylorlive]

[picsfortheday]

[reasoningdaily]

Pioneered by digital literacy experts, the "Sift" strategy is a technique for spotting fake news and misleading social media posts, says Amanda Ruggeri.

It's no secret that misinformation is rampant on social media. And it's even more so in some subjects than others. Research has found, for example, that around two-thirds of the most popular YouTube videos on vaccines contain misinformation. The fall-out can be dire: an uptick in inaccurate anti-vaccination content online correlates with a decline in vaccination coverage, especially among children. That has led to larger outbreaks of potentially deadly diseases, like measles, than have been seen in recent years.

"Misinformation is worse than an epidemic," Marcia McNutt, president of the US National Academy of Sciences, put it in 2021, implicitly referring to the Covid-19 pandemic. "It spreads at the speed of light throughout the globe and can prove deadly when it reinforces misplaced personal bias against all trustworthy evidence."

HOW NOT TO BE MANIPULATED

In today's onslaught of overwhelming information (and misinformation), it can be difficult to know who to trust. In this column, Amanda Ruggeri explores smart, thoughtful ways to navigate the noise. Drawing on insights from psychology, social science and media literacy, it offers practical advice, new ideas and evidence-based solutions for how to be a wiser, more discerning critical thinker.

There are many reasons why misinformation travels so quickly – according to some research, even faster than accurate information. One reason is that people are far more likely to share a claim when it confirms their pre-existing beliefs, regardless of its accuracy. This cognitive bias may help explain why even more misinformation seems to be shared by individuals than by bots. One study, for example, found that just 15% of news sharers spread up to 40% of fake news.

That's a sobering statistic, but there's an upside. As long as individuals are the ones responsible for sharing so much misinformation, we're also the ones who – by being more mindful of what we "like", share, and amplify – can help make the greatest change.

When it comes to not falling for misinformation, being aware of our human fallibilities, such as our quickness to believe what we want to believe, is a good first step. Research shows that even being more reflective in general can "inoculate" us against believing fake news.

But it's not the only thing that we can do. In particular, researchers have found there are several simple, concrete strategies that we all can (and should) use, especially before we're tempted to share or repeat a claim, to verify its accuracy first.

One of my favourites comes with a nifty acronym: the Sift method. Pioneered by digital literacy expert Mike Caulfield, it breaks down into four easy-to-remember steps.

1. S is for… Stop

Perhaps one of the most pernicious aspects of the modern era is its urgency. Thanks to everything from our continual phone use to nonstop work demands, far too many of us seem to be navigating the world at a dizzying speed.

Being online, where both news cycles and content are especially fast-paced and often emotive, can put us in a particularly "urgent" mindset. But when it comes to identifying misinformation, immediacy is not our friend. Research has found that relying on our immediate "gut" reactions is more likely to lead us astray than if we take a moment to stop and reflect. 

The first step of the Sift method interrupts this tendency. Stop. Don't share the post. Don't comment on it. And move on to the next step.

2. I is for… Investigate the source

Posts show up in our social media feeds all the time without us having a clear sense of who created them. Maybe they were shared by a friend. Maybe they were pushed to us by the algorithm. Maybe we followed the creator intentionally, but never looked into their background.

Now's the time to find this out. Who created this post? Get off-platform and do a web search. And because search results can be misleading, make sure you're looking at a reputable website. One that fact-checkers often use as a first port of call might surprise you: Wikipedia. While it's not perfect, it has the benefit of being crowd-sourced, which means that its articles about specific well-known people or organisations often cover aspects like controversies and political biases.

While you're investigating, ask:

If the creator is a media outlet, are they reputable and respected, with a recognised commitment to verified, independent journalism?

If it's an individual, what expertise do they have in the subject at hand (if any)? What financial ties, political leanings or personal biases may be at play?

If it's an organisation or a business, what is their purpose? What do they advocate for, or sell? Where does their funding come from? What political leanings have they shown?

And finally, once you've run your analysis (which can take just a couple of minutes), the most telling question of all: Would you still trust this creator's expertise in this subject if they were saying something you disagreed with?

3. F is for… Find better coverage

If, from the previous step, you find that you still have questions about the source's credibility, now's the time to dig a little further. What you're looking for is whether a more trustworthy source, like a reputable news outlet or fact-checking service, has reported and verified the same claim.

No surprise, but I find Google has some of the best tools for doing this. Obviously, there's Google itself, and if you're specifically looking to see if news outlets have covered something, Google News.

But I sometimes prefer to use the Google Fact Check search engine, which searches just fact-checking sites, specifically. Just keep in mind that Google says it doesn't vet the fact-checking sites it includes, so to make sure your results are reputable, you'll need to do a little further sleuthing – I like to see if an outlet has signed up to Poynter's International Fact-Checking Network, which you can check here.

If it's a photo you're investigating, use a reverse image search tool to see where else the image comes up online. Google has one, but I also like TinEye and Yandex. (You can also use these for video: take a screenshot from the video and put that in for your image search).

Your goal? To see whether there are any credible sources reporting the same information as what you're seeing, and saying that it's verified.

4. T is for… Trace the claim to its original context

Often, you'll wind up doing this at the same time that you're trying to find better coverage, at least if you're using the tools mentioned above. But the idea here is a little different. You're trying to find out where the claim came from originally.

Even if you see that a claim has been reported on by a credible media outlet, for example, it may not be original reporting; they may have gotten that claim from another outlet. Ideally, the original story should be linked – so always go there – but if it's not, you may need to search for it separately.

Crucially, you want to figure out not just whether something like this really is true, but whether anything was taken out of context. If you're looking at an image, does how it was described in the social media post you saw line up with what its original caption, context, and location? If it's a quotation from a speaker, was anything edited out or taken out of context or, when you see their full interview or speech, does it seem like perhaps they misspoke in that moment?

Taking these steps before deciding whether to simply share a claim might feel onerous. But the time investment of just a few minutes may save you not only embarrassment – but help ensure you're not spreading misinformation that, at its most dramatic, can even lead to illness and death.

Today, anyone can make a claim on social media. And anyone can be the person whose re-sharing of that claim is the one who makes it go viral. That means it's the responsibility of each one of us to make sure that what we are posting, liking, and sharing is, first and foremost, actually true.

[alex51324]

Sadly, Politifact says no.

Apparently the original poster claims to have had private communications with 25 Republican senators who say they would vote to remove Trump from office. While it's technically possible that this could have happened, there's no particular reason to believe it did. The account has posted exaggerated and false stories before, and is an unlikely candidate for these Senators to have chosen to confide in, and they certainly aren't saying anything like it to the reputable media outlets.

[bills-bible-basics]

SIFTED BY SATAN -- KJV (King James Version) Bible Verse List #Scriptures #BibleStudy #BibleVerses "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." Genesis 3:1-5, KJV "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." Luke 22:31-32, KJV "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." John 8:44, KJV "Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices." 2 Corinthians 2:11, KJV "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." 2 Corinthians 4:4, KJV "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ . . . And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." 2 Corinthians 11:3, 14 KJV "Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:" Ephesians 2:2, KJV "Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand." Ephesians 6:10-13, KJV "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:" 1 Peter 5:8, KJV If you would like more info regarding the origin of these KJV Bible verse lists, go to https://www.billkochman.com/VerseLists/. Thank-you! https://www.billkochman.com/Blog/index.php/sifted-by-satan-kjv-king-james-version-bible-verse-list/?SIFTED%20BY%20SATAN%20--%20KJV%20%28King%20James%20Version%29%20Bible%20Verse%20List

[annoyinglyoptimisticcompute-blog]

Proto-Indo-European

*krey-[2]

to sift, separate, divide

[seventhgenerationant]

This is so beautifully put.

If you, for some reason, still have a subscription to the Atlantic, cancel it

[tyrnn]

Miyuu Mayhemm

She'll keep Earth nice and warm in there...

Posted using PostyBirb

[nightmare-from-heaven]

All this, except don't immediately discount something if it has lots of opposites or "against"s.

For example, if you search "transgender stuff is not real", you will get a LOT of confirming information.

I am becoming aware of the effect a lack of trust in the media has had on people, paired with a dearth of research skills.

[pratignya18]

Stocked!

Do you have any collections? Life is a collection of moments. And I cherish every moment. I completed my Social Communications Media Course, from Sophia Polytechnic a couple of decades ago. As part of this course, I completed an exhaustive course in photography. I am not among the best photographers to graduate from the course, but I applied my learnings to everyday life. I am, what is commonly…

[mtgatherercomments]

[colonelparable]

I hate arriving to fandoms late cause I'm sitting over here dusting off posts from 2022 and screaming about them 2.5 years later feeling like this

[othomas30]

Broncos vs. Chiefs

It has felt like an eternity, enduring a revolving door of subpar quarterbacks, ineffective coaching, and the frustrating inability to synchronize a potent offense with a dominant defense. Sprinkle in an abundance of messy, penalty-laden plays and a touch of listlessness, and these Broncos seemed destined to prove they couldn't compete.

Then, in a surprising turn of events on Sunday, the Denver Broncos astounded everyone, including themselves, by delivering the most impressive football performance the Mile High City has witnessed in years.

Perhaps this team, which stumbled to an 0-3 start this season, isn't as dire as it appeared. Credit is due where credit is earned, as defensive coordinator Vance Joseph made crucial adjustments and rallied this defensive unit. The same group that allowed Miami to rack up 70 points managed to limit the reigning Super Bowl champions and the league MVP to just 9 points.

Coach Sean Payton, at last, fully embraced the running game, a preseason promise that became a reality. Jaleel McLaughlin and Javonte Williams seem to have provided the solution to the formerly stagnant and uninspired offensive schemes. While the frustration of Russell Wilson's infrequent connections with receivers beyond the line of scrimmage remains, it's hard to complain when decisive victories, like the one on Sunday, are within reach.

Sunday's triumph has made the daunting stretch of opponents the Broncos must face to finish the season seem less intimidating. Teams that seemed invincible early in the season, such as the Bills (who recently lost to the Patriots), now appear vulnerable. Injuries have hindered quarterbacks for the Vikings and Browns. Factor in two games against the Chargers and the season finale in Las Vegas against the Raiders, and one can't help but wonder – could the Broncos embark on a winning streak? Is it possible that, after years of mediocrity, there's finally some captivating football to be witnessed in Denver this December?

We will see...