#but it is not my job to try and teach someone media literacy that seems to be unwilling to learn anyway

[ganondoodle]

i am so extremely confused on how you can acknowledge belly dancing not needing to be sexual yet. still insist that nintendo is sexualizing young gerudo with the attire. the makeup, heels and how impractical it is to wear the shit they wear in the desert i understand. im not defending those design mistakes. but??? jfc.

oh. so, assuming you are the same anon as before, you WERE asking in bad faith then, or are intentionally missunderstanding what im saying, got it, and now you are trying to twist my words around to fit your little narrative about me being the problem and not mega corporation uwu nintendo with a history of racism (to which this issue is extremely attached to)

so, since you apparently didnt understand what i said, and didnt watch the video i attached either, bc that goes into detail of everything as well, im gonna spell it out once more, and i will even EMPHASIZE words like THIS, so its easier to understand, just for you <3

i did NOT say that the 'belly dance' outfit doesnt NEED to be sexual, i SAID it is/was not sexual IN ITS ORIGIN, BUT was TURNED INTO what boils down to nothing else but a sexy strippers outfit by western people and has been used as NOTHING BUT sexual for decades in the vast majority of media of all kind-

which MEANS, that although in ORIGIN it might not have been sexual, the unfortunate PROBLEM is that through its extreme popularization as such you now have to assume IT IS sexual, bc that is pretty much ALWAYS the intent, people dont even know it as anything but a sexual thing

and before you can even say the "well maybe they didnt intent it a such" blah blah, this is NOT SOLELY about the outfit itself being the only problem here, its the whole package, even if they DID have good intentions or did it subconsciously (which, mind you, should also tell you just how much this kind of picture of middle eastern people has been spread, how common it is to see them like this that its what most people actually think they are like) it nevertheless sends a certain message, and again, ITS THE WHOLE FUCKING PACKAGE, everything, from outfit, to design elements, to dialog, to lore, to even camera angles, you cannot view it as a seperate thing bc it is, inherently, not able to be seperated from everything, its as if you took an incredibly racist caricature, zoomed in and said "LOOK they used a realistic kind of skin tone, its totally not racist!!"

you also called these design decisions "mistakes", but they are not, in fact mistakes, a mistake is when you notice after posting a drawing that you forgot to color in a strand of hair, however, ALL of these design and writing decisions are deliberate, they had to sit down, in a giant team of people, to come up with it, then proceed to design and write it, approve it, make it, and ship it, and saw no problem with it, which is a problem

now, im not saying nintendo personally is telling you "its ok to fuck kids", but things have meanings, and if you are making something, ESPECIALLY using something that isnt of your own culture, you should think about things, and what meanings a thing can have attached to, they are a giant corporation, not a single, very uninformed at best- or very racist at worst, human being, they have the means to do research, but they did not do it or think its fine, maybe even good, which deserves to be called out

i am a big, and longtime, zelda fan, but beign a fan of something doesnt mean you cannot criticise it, or aknowledge that its in many ways flawed, part of being a fan is being able to recognize things that are bad and demand better

if you send me another ask spouting bullshit or purposefully missunderstanding what im saying im gonna punt you into the filthy barrel of blocked porn bots, bc i dont have anon messages enabled to receive shit like this but to allow people who might be too shy to send normal asks to talk to me.

jfc.

[asb9747]

Media Literacy Week 6 Blog Post

Michael Foucault’s What is an Author? is entirely, and maybe more so, applicable in today’s internet meme and content driven society. Kids, teenagers, and even adults across multiple generations are producing memes at all times and on all modes of social media, both popular and unpopular. I could log on to TikTok right now and see the same dance done to the same music by a seemingly infinite number of users on that platform, and it would be nearly impossible for me to determine who exactly created this dance, why they created it, whether they expected to go “viral” or not, or why this particular instance of social media participation has taken hold of the internet, if only momentarily.

When Foucault asserts, “Discourse that possesses an author’s name is not to be immediately consumed and forgotten; neither is it accorded the momentary attention given to ordinary, fleeting words. Rather, its status and its manner of reception are regulated by the culture in which it circulates,” I am immediately reminded of the effect that meme culture has on the youth of today, and how memes have, in a sense, flipped this assertion on it’s head.

It’s not until later in the essay that Foucault comes around to where I believe memes fit in to society today, when he writes, referring to authors like Homer and Aristotle, “The distinctive contribution of these authors is that they produced not only their own work, but the possibility and the rules of formation of other texts.” This point illustrates the power and danger of authorship when teaching media and media literacy to young people today.

In a way, the anonymity of the internet, particularly in meme, sampling, and remixing subcultures, is a double-edged blade. Students in today’s connected world are more likely than ever to author new types of media, whether that be a new style of music, an essay that explores previously unthought-of content, or a film that takes advantage of rising inexpensive technology and the powerful editing software that comes standard on most computers these days. The possibilities for creative expression and inspiration are endless. There is a negative to that connectivity though, which is the possibility of being completely lost in the sweeping scope of the Web. In my previous example of a TikTok video that goes viral and inspires millions to recreate and remix that original content, the originator of such a video will forever remain anonymous.

The authorship doesn’t matter for the creation of a particular moment in internet history - it’s the movement itself that remains and evolves. Celebrities will latch on to the phenomenon and it will be played out until it reaches its inevitable saturation point and is run into the ground. What will happen to the person, most likely a young person, who created this worldwide phenomenon? If they can continue their prolific production and retain their followers, they may end up in the strange new world of “internet fame,” but if they can’t continue to produce content that is widely consumed, they may fade into oblivion or be eaten by the same media engulfing amoeba that may have gathered the writings of Aristotle or Shakespeare under common authorship.

So what is there to do in order to teach young people about these phenomena that spread like hungry wildfires? It seems readily apparent to me that my job as a media literacy instructor and mentor will be to make sure children and teenagers don’t fall into the trap of feeling as though they need to break out, blow up, or become famous overnight. It may be hard to sell, because just the idea of getting thousands of likes on an Instagram photo, being retweeted by a comedian on Twitter, or racking up followers on TikTok must seem entirely alluring to a person who has spent a great deal of their childhood and adolescent years consuming brightly colored content accompanied by the catchiest of tunes.

I do not feel comfortable calling what is happening, the desire of many youths to become some sort of internet star, a sickness. It is the natural outcome of a society that values fame and celebrity, then gives all of its members a chance to be connected to every other member. I also run the risk of sounding like someone who rejects social media entirely, which is not true at all. I love using Instagram. I find it to be an effective method of journaling, in this case a visual journal. I can try out combinations of photos in series, or just catch up with what my friends and family are doing. The risk comes with dopamine-spiking likes, businesses being built of the sexuality of young people, and exploitative data-mining that leads to invasive advertising techniques.

The negatives of social media have been there since the beginning, but I believe since COVID-19 has hit and made all of us turn to our screens even more, it is more vital now to reach young people and show them that they need to manage their online personas carefully. I worry about a future where nobody can get credit for the work they produce. A future where a student of mine creates something beautifully engaging on the internet, and it is ripped off and sold to a major corporation that will bastardize and reproduce the work for their own gain, but not the gain of the creator. A connected world is great for inspiration and collaboration, but the reality is that the idyllic values proposed by a truly democratic and interconnected Web will always be appropriated and skewed by those looking to make big money. I worry about exploitation in all forms, and I worry that someone out there will always be looking for a way to make someone’s hard work into an advertisement, whether it is subtle or grossly overt.

The only way to make sure that the impact is mitigated is to teach young people how to recognize the sinister arm of The Corporation and how, even though what they are making may be a new template for new ways of expression, as Foucault refers to the work of Homer and Aristotle, someone may want to take their work and use it for their own, usually monetary, gain.

[edivupage]

Who to Believe on Twitter

A recent tweet caught my attention. It was posted by Sherry Sanden, a professor at Illinois State, in response to a thread from APM reporter Emily Hanford, well known to educators for her reporting in the last 18 months on the best way to teach reading and the state of reading instruction in the US. Hanford was responding (I think) to an abstract of a talk Sanden and colleague Deborah MacPhee were to present at ILA, which Hanford thought was inaccurate and possibly a response to her reporting. Hanford posted a series of 14 tweets supporting various aspects of her claims about reading, many with links to the scientific research she cited. I know this is convoluted and honestly I don't think it matters much, but I'm trying to provide some context. Here's what I really wanted to get at. This is one of Sanden’s tweets in reply to Hanford.

I won’t take the time here to defend Hanford’s reporting—I’ve recommended her reports in the past and think they are solid, but she did a fine job of defending herself. I’d like to comment on the obvious implication that Sanden should be taken more seriously because of her job; she’s a professor of education at Illinois State. She has credentials: she has a PhD in the relevant discipline, she publishes research on the topic, presents at professional conferences, and so on. This is called argument from authority. In this instance, here’s the form Sanden is hoping it will take. Proposition 1: Sanden has research-based reasons for believing that X is true about early literacy. Proposition 2: Random tweeters don’t understand research very well, but have good reason to believe Proposition 1 is true (because of Sanden’s credentials). Conclusion: Random tweeters believe that conclusion X is supported by research.   I considered argument from authority at more length in When Can You Trust the Experts, but here’s a short version. ​ Believing something because someone else believes it rather than demanding and evaluating evidence makes you sound either lazy or gullible. But we yield to the authority of others all the time. When I see my doctor I don’t ask for evidence that the treatments he prescribes are effective, and when an architect designed a new deck for my house I didn’t ask for proof that it could support the weight of my grill and outdoor furniture. I believed what they told me because of their authority. I think education researchers don’t speak with that kind of authority and (apparently unlike Sanden) I don’t think we deserve it. I can point to two key differences between a doctor (or architect, or accountant, or electrician, etc) and education researchers. First, I yield authority to someone who has been vetted by a credible entity. I know that, unless you break the law, you cannot practice medicine (or follow the other professions named) without being licensed by the state of Virginia. I haven’t looked into the matter, but I have no reason to think that the accrediting agencies aren’t doing an acceptable job. For one think, most of the professionals I hire achieve what I expect them to achieve. Education researchers, in contrast, are not licensed by a credible authority. Anyone can take the title “education researcher.” That’s why we must point to earmarks of authority like academic degrees, training, and publications ; these make the silent claim “people with expertise think I’m an expert too,” which is, of course, a bit circular. Sometimes researchers mention television, radio and public speaking appearances. That’s called “social proof,” boiling down to “other people think I’m worth listening to. The problem is that these earmarks of authority are not very reliable. The marketplace is cluttered with purveyors of snake oil who bear degrees, and even some who have published articles in “peer-reviewed” journals. As readers of this blog know, the idea that “peer review” is a guarantee of high quality in a journal does not bear close scrutiny. But there’s a second, more important difference between education research and professions where people readily accept argument from authority. Those other fields have more accepted truths. When I get an electrician to figure out why the breaker in my living room keeps flipping, I understand she may be more or less skillful in diagnosis and repair than another licensed electrician. What I don’t expect is that she could have wildly different—perhaps completely opposing—ideas about how electricity works and how to wire a house compared to someone else I might have called. Education researchers do not speak with one voice, and that makes it hard to expect an argument from authority will work, as they take this form: Proposition 1: Sanden says that when it comes to early reading, scientific research suggests “X” is true. Proposition 2: Willingham says that when it comes to early reading, scientific research suggests “not X” is true. Proposition 3: Random tweeter has equally good reason to believe (based on their credentials) that Proposition 1 and Proposition 2 are true. Conclusion: ?????? We can’t make arguments from authority if equally authoritative people disagree. Part of the problem is that people who enter these arguments actually come at the problems with different assumptions and understandings about what constitutes evidence, and indeed, what it means to know something. That’s most obvious when we have had very different training. Cognitive psychologists and researchers in critical theory address aspects of education that are largely non-overlapping, and you’ll find some of each these folks in most schools of education, with similar credentials. I’ve argued elsewhere that those of us in education research would do ourselves a favor if we would make our assumptions more explicit, as well as the limitations of the tools in our analytic toolbox—what problems are our methods well suited to answer and what can’t we answer? I think you don’t hear that often enough. A final note. Later in the thread Sanden posted this

​And then this…

​Understood, but that’s social media. It may be frustrating and seem ludicrous that teachers use it to inform themselves, but here we are. If you want people to believe you, it's incumbent on you to explain your reasoning. 

Who to Believe on Twitter published first on https://sapsnkra.tumblr.com

[biofunmy]

How To Talk To Boomers And Other Older People In Your Life About Fake News

Ben Kothe / BuzzFeed News; Getty Images

This story is part of Protect Your Parents From the Internet Week.

“Look for the magnifying glass icon,” said Patrick Costales as he pointed to a tablet showing YouTube on its screen.

Costales, 15, was teaching Michele Bianchi, 81, how to search for episodes of Bianchi’s favorite Italian TV shows. This was the fifth Saturday in a row they’d met in the basement of a Toronto library so the teenager could show Bianchi how to email, read news, listen to music, and perform other online tasks as part of a program called Cyber Seniors.

After the session, Costales sat next to his friend and fellow tutor, Mareson Suresh, 15, to discuss the online behavior of the older people in their lives. Had they ever seen an adult post something problematic on social media?

“Frequently,” said Costales.

“My mom loves taking pictures, and even if she says she won’t post it, she posts it,” Suresh said. “And the thing is, I don’t follow her on Facebook or anything because I don’t use Facebook, but she’s big on it.”

Be it personal photos or false or inflammatory articles and memes, young people find themselves struggling to manage, and at times confront, the extremely online adults in their lives.

Boomers and older generations are by no means the only people having trouble in our new and chaotic information environment, although research suggests they have the most pressing challenges. Younger people also face difficulty, which is why so many news literacy programs target K-12 and college students. But the rapid pace of change on online platforms — and the lack of widespread reach of programs like Cyber Seniors — have left some older adults struggling to catch up.

“Now what are you going to do about the adults?”

The challenge is to handle the situation in a way that works and doesn’t fray intergenerational relationships, according to Mike Caulfield, director of blended and networked learning at Washington State University Vancouver. He also runs the Digital Polarization Initiative, which pioneers new approaches to teaching information literacy. Caulfield said his students see the need for older people in their lives to learn the skills he’s teaching.

“Students in every class said, ‘This is great, [now] what are you going to do about the adults?’ It’s one of the consistent things that come up. And it’s not half jokingly; I feel like it’s very sincere,” he said. “I do feel when they bring this up, they have very specific people in mind.”

Fortunately, Caulfield and other experts have advice.

So does Suresh, one of the Toronto teens who’s spent weeks helping seniors master the basics of devices and the internet. “Just say it,” he said. “I know it’s weird talking to your family about those specific topics, but it’ll benefit them much more … so you just might as well say it as soon as possible.”

Naomi Harris For Buzzfeed News

Eufemia Bianchi and her husband, Michele Bianchi, take lessons in technology with Patrick Costales and Mareson Suresh at the Toronto Public Library.

Supply the Missing Context

This one might be called the John Cusack Problem.

Last month the actor tweeted a cartoon that showed a hand emblazoned with the Star of David seeming to crush a group of people. Near it was the quote “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” It was attributed to Voltaire, but the line actually originated with white nationalist Kevin Alfred Strom. Cusack, 53, also added his own comment to the tweet: “Follow the money.”

After facing blowback for the anti-Semitic message, Cusack blamed a “bot.” Then he said he didn’t understand the implications of what he shared. “I mistakenly retweeted an alt right account I thought was agreeing with the horrible bombing of a hospital in Palestine,” he tweeted.

Caulfield said it’s common for older people to unwittingly share things that have extremist messages or iconography. “It’s very hard to see people posting stuff that may come from a kind of a dark place that they don’t realize is dark,” Caulfield said. “What do you do when your parents go from posting Minions to posting hard-right memes about cement milkshakes?”

He says it’s important to intervene privately and help the person understand the larger — and more concerning — context.

“There’s a good chance your family member doesn’t understand that and might be horrified at what they’re sharing. And so there’s a point to intervene and let people know, ‘Hey, I know, this was probably not what you meant, but…’”

Keep It Positive and Personal

Experts agree that being non-confrontational is key. Daniel Kent founded Net Literacy, a nonprofit, in 2003 when he was in middle school in Indiana. One of its first programs was Senior Connects, which helps older people get online and gain basic internet skills.

“I think it’s fundamentally about treating [older people] with concern and respect. Recognizing that … perhaps they had the best of intentions, but the execution on their part perhaps wasn’t the most, the most thoughtful and mindful,” he said.

If you do want to say something, Kent and Caulfield suggest engaging in person — or by direct message or phone if that’s not possible. If you call someone out publicly on Facebook or elsewhere, they’re likely to feel attacked or shamed, and you won’t have a chance to hear why they wanted to share a particular piece of content. Understanding where someone is coming from and why they shared or posted what they did is essential, Kent and Caulfield say.

“With our volunteers [we] preach as much empathy as possible,” Kent said.

Naomi Harris for BuzzFeed News

But Don’t Be Afraid to Go Public

While engaging privately is often best, there are cases where you may want to intervene publicly. For example, if an acquaintance is sharing false or misleading information that’s generating lots of engagement.

“You can think of yourself as intervening not really to stop the poster, but intervening on behalf of your friends who are seeing this and may get suckered by it,” he said.

The rule of not being aggressive or confrontational still applies. He suggested acknowledging the original poster’s sentiment, adding to the discussion by sharing an alternate report about the same topic, and saying why it offers a more accurate portrayal.

Get Them to Google (News) It

When someone in your life seems to share information that’s unmoored from reality, try to understand what emotion, opinion, or idea the person is trying to express — and shift them toward a better place to get that information.

“You push them to a better source that is related to their concern,” said Caulfield.

One caveat: If the particular idea or claim is odious or clearly false, it’s not your job to help them express it. “If they’re a white supremacist, don’t validate their concern,” he said. “But if they have a concern that is is somewhat valid, that comes from valid worries, you can empathize.”

“Hey, look, one of these headlines is not like the others.”

Caulfield suggests encouraging the person to search for the central topic or claim on Google News, which exercises control over which websites are included in its database. This helps locate a story from a more credible source that still acknowledges their point of view or emotion.

“Nine times out of 10, you could make your point with a story from USA Today,” said Caulfield. “It might not be the same clickbait headline, but it takes you 10 seconds to go find an [alternate] story.”

This exercise also exposes the person to different headlines about the same topic, helping them see which facts are broadly consistent across different outlets, or not. “There’s just something that is really powerful about going to Google News and scanning those headlines and seeing, ‘Hey, look, one of these headlines is not like the others,’” he said.

Naomi Harris for BuzzFeed News

Eufemia and Michele Bianchi at the Toronto Public Library.

Look in the Mirror

Be self-aware enough to realize you may also not have the best information-consumption habits, either. Practice finding other sources for a story and compare details to learn to spot inconsistencies between coverage. Then share the good stuff. You can also choose to do that instead of intervening with friends and family.

“In most cases, you’re better off sharing new material with family members that will resonate with them or focusing correction efforts on people with bigger platforms than Uncle Rick,” Caulfield said.

Even if some of the adults in your life struggle with what they share, they’re still people with a wealth of knowledge, experience, and love to offer. Suresh, the 15-year-old in Toronto, taught his 79-year-old student, Eufemia Bianchi, many things about her Samsung phone, but it has also been a learning experience for him.

“I feel like one of the biggest things about this program is having a reason to talk to elders, because as teens you don’t have that many opportunities to talk to some of the smartest people in your community, and especially people who have all those life experiences,” he said. ●

Sahred From Source link Technology

from WordPress http://bit.ly/2Yb8f3c via IFTTT