Critical Thinking and Other Tools to Navigate the Media Environment & Engage with your Audience
Our workshop ‘Critical Thinking and Other Tools to Navigate the Media Environment & Engage with your Audience’ was successfully conducted on Monday, May 6th. We are thankful to have had the opportunity to be hosted at the Groundbreakers International Exchange Program in Emmen, The Netherlands. During this program, youths from Denmark, Spain, Greece, and the Netherlands got together and received training on, among others, community building, decision-making, and presentation.
In our workshop, we aimed to spark curiosity and enhance understanding in critical thinking, media literacy, and digital literacy, especially when navigating the online world filled with suspicious information. Throughout the session, we delved into the societal impact of misinformation and disinformation, focusing on health-related issues, with additional insights into migration and climate change.
Session: Monday, 6th May, 10.00-11.30, Critical Thinking and Other Tools to Navigate the Media Environment & Engage with your Audience
Number of participants: 25
Speakers: Laura Bucher & Helena Comella Romeu, Dare to be Grey
The session began with an explanation of two human tendencies: consuming sensational stories that carry out a lot of emotions, and seeking and agreeing with information that aligns with our pre-existing beliefs and values. We then continued with the explanation of the objectives of the Immune2Infodemic project and the challenges that unreliable and unverified information pose to our democratic participation and informed decisions. A special space has been given to engage the students around the use and application of critical thinking through theoretical explanations, discussions, and case studies. Critical thinking has been proven to be an important skill for avoiding biases, solving problems, communicating effectively, and becoming an informed citizen. Students gave their own opinions on the importance of critical thinking in the context of mis/disinformation. For example, some pointed out that it is a skill that helps avoid polarisation and builds your ideas about a topic. Others believed that critical thinking is a useful tool that helps navigate a vast amount of information and discern true from false statements.
Some case studies were presented to showcase real-life social media posts and the concrete application of critical thinking, media literacy, and digital literacy tools.
First, we emphasized the importance of receiving accurate information to make informed decisions regarding our health. By promoting access to reliable sources and fostering critical thinking skills, we empower individuals to navigate the vast sea of health information effectively. Making informed choices not only enhances personal well-being but also contributes to the overall health of our communities. The first post was related to a claim spreading inaccurate information regarding sunscreen safety. We together analysed the claim using a media literacy tool called ‘Check with 3 questions’ which helps to evaluate the reliability of claims on social media, asking yourself ‘Who is behind the information?’, ‘What is the evidence behind?’, ‘What do other sources say?’. We concluded that scientific evidence contradicted the claim made in the post showing the importance of evaluating the trustworthiness of the scientific claims.
Second, we introduced a post with anti-migrant and xenophobic messaging and fostered a reflection on the provoked emotions and intentions of the author. Participants gave their opinions regarding the divisive nature of the post, emphasizing the fact that the creator of the post would want to instill feelings of threat and fear in the reader. To help analyse such a claim, we introduced the so-called Socratic Questioning together with some tips regarding fact-checking methods (e.g. browsing through multiple pages to find reliable sources).
Finally, we presented the statement of a third post claiming that illegal migrants would receive financial preferential treatment from the Spanish government. Participants were instructed to conduct their research and fact-check the claim by using the ‘Check with 3 questions’ that was previously mentioned. The assignment sparked a discussion about the importance of verifying the evidence provided in claims and ensuring that multiple sources corroborate the argument.
The last part of the session included a brief theoretical introduction to rhetoric and its powerful use when engaging in debates or when crafting messaging that intends to create an emotional impact or persuade the audience. Participants were assigned to craft compelling headlines or invitations to appeal to the audience's values and beliefs, following the guidelines outlined in the session.
At the end, participants engaged in discussions about the lessons learned during the session. For example, they reflected on the fact that the social media ecosystem is built for intentional as well as accidental information to spread out quickly. They also commented on the usefulness of the media literacy tool ‘Stop, Think, Check’ for reacting and fact-checking to suspicious or emotion-provoking media content. One participant followed up by emphasizing the challenge of embarking on a polarising discussion with an audience that might hold different opinions. We stressed the importance of connecting with the audience’s shared values and beliefs to diminish polarising sentiments and give space to the middle ‘grey’ area. To conclude, we highlighted the relevance of critical thinking skills for making informed decisions and becoming independent thinkers. In the final concluding session, we reiterated the significance of fostering open dialogue and critical analysis in addressing the complexities of our information landscape, emphasizing the role of initiatives like the Immune2Infodemic project in promoting informed civic engagement and combating the spread of misinformation.
