Who Can You Trust? Crash Course Navigating Digital Information #4 — Transcript

Full transcript

1. 0:00Hi I’m John Green and this is Crash Course Navigating Digital Information.
2. 0:04So here at Crash Course, we work hard to bring you entertaining and educational videos on
3. 0:08everything from science to literature, but how do you know that we’re like telling
4. 0:12you the truth?
5. 0:13And is our work invalidated by the fact we sometimes make mistakes?
6. 0:16I would say often.
7. 0:17The thing is, unless you’re an expert in every subject we make videos about, you don’t
8. 0:22know.
9. 0:23And that is precisely what makes it so easy to be misled, both online and off.
10. 0:27None of us has the time or the talent to become an expert in everything.
11. 0:32I made this helpful Venn Diagram of people who could debunk myths about climate change,
12. 0:36myths about victorian literature, and conspiracy theories about the illuminati, and as you
13. 0:41can see there is nobody who can do all three.
14. 0:44So we have to trust information from outside of ourselves.
15. 0:48We have to find a way to accredit and trust experts, even though they will be wrong some
16. 0:53of the time.
17. 0:54So today, we’re going to think about how to do that especially online.
18. 1:02INTRO So whenever you open an app or a website,
19. 1:09you see information and content that was made somewhere by someone.
20. 1:14With lateral reading -- or, leaving a site to find out what others say about it -- you
21. 1:18can learn who that someone or group of someones is.
22. 1:21But when we try to learn more about a person or organization, what should we be looking
23. 1:25for?
24. 1:26Well, before putting your trust in a source, you need to explore two more things:
25. 1:30The authority of the person or organization presenting the information
26. 1:35And their perspective.
27. 1:36When I say “authority” I mean one’s recognized knowledge or expertise on a topic.
28. 1:41Famed primatologist Jane Goodall is an authority on chimpanzees.
29. 1:45Dwayne The Rock Johnson is an authority when it comes to lifting heavy objects repetitively,
30. 1:51and also he is the greatest actor of his generation.
31. 1:54Slight sidenote, I once met Dwayne The Rock Johnson and I know he looks ripped in movies
32. 1:57and stuff but in real life he is so ripped!
33. 2:01What were we talking about?
34. 2:02Right authority.
35. 2:03If you want to tell if a source is an authority on a topic you need to leave the source.
36. 2:07Because nobody is going to be like, “I am not an authority on this topic.
37. 2:10Here.
38. 2:11Listen to me bloviate.”
39. 2:12Look you’re going to hear me say that a lot during this series.
40. 2:15You need to leave sites to understand them.
41. 2:18I know that sounds counterintuitive, but it’s always a good idea to leave a source to understand
42. 2:24if it is a good source.
43. 2:25Vertically reading a website or article only gives you the information that the source
44. 2:29wants you to see.
45. 2:30As we talked about in our last episode, it’s really easy to make a website or social media
46. 2:35account look authoritative.
47. 2:37While using lateral reading techniques to investigate a source’s authority, you want
48. 2:41to consider several factors: The author or authors’ professional background
49. 2:45The process they used to produce that information And the systems that are in place to catch
50. 2:50mistakes and correct them An author’s professional or educational
51. 2:54background can indicate whether they are actually qualified to speak knowledgeably about a topic.
52. 2:59Generally speaking, those who work professionally in a field or have done lots of work within
53. 3:03it, are better equipped than you know random people off the street.
54. 3:07That doesn’t mean that experts are always right of course but they are more likely to
55. 3:11be right than the random people off the street.
56. 3:14So, a scientist who has published studies on climate change in prominent journals is
57. 3:19a much more reliable source on climate change than a blogger with no formal science training.
58. 3:24My neighbor who has been gardening for 40 years definitely knows more about growing
59. 3:28plants than I do, as they like to remind me every time they see me toiling in ignorance
60. 3:33in my new vegetable garden.
61. 3:34And an agriculturalist who has spent years studying the growth of plants will know even
62. 3:38more than my neighbor.
63. 3:39I don’t want to go on a rant here.
64. 3:40But failure to believe in and trust expertise is a big problem on the internet.
65. 3:46Also, probably off the Internet, but I live here.
66. 3:49Another good indicator of whether a source is reputable is the process that source used
67. 3:54to produce or gather information.
68. 3:55If you’re reading an article on, like, my favorite celebrity becoming the first pop
69. 3:59star to sing on the moon and there are no sources listed -- yeah, no, that’s just
70. 4:04fan fiction I’m writing.
71. 4:05And also you can’t read it yet it’s not done.
72. 4:07Actually, you can read it, but it’s really rough so just be gentle.
73. 4:10ANYWAY, the process a source used to gather information is often right there in their
74. 4:15work.
75. 4:16A reporter might attend a protest and talk to some protesters, and then describe those
76. 4:19conversations in a story.
77. 4:21Or a professor might explain in their new study that they asked 5,000 people whether
78. 4:25they liked chocolate or vanilla best.
79. 4:27An Instagrammer tagging the person they’ve re-grammed is also citing their process.
80. 4:32Some news organizations even publish their journalistic ethics, philosophies and methodologies
81. 4:36for the public.
82. 4:37The New York Time, Wall Street Journal, and Washington Post all have their lengthy handbooks
83. 4:42on editorial standards, which are available online.
84. 4:45The system in place to catch mistakes is just as important as the process a source uses
85. 4:49to collect information.
86. 4:50As I’ve mentioned in previous videos, news publications often employ fact checkers and
87. 4:55professional journalists and editors also take part in fact-checking efforts during
88. 4:59the process of writing articles.
89. 5:01And sometimes another force steps in to help point out mistakes: the public.
90. 5:05They might write a letter to the editor or leave a comment.
91. 5:07They’ll definitely tell you when you’re wrong.
92. 5:09But you already know that, you’re on YouTube.
93. 5:11Hello commenters!
94. 5:12It’s me John Green.
95. 5:13I’d like to thank all 3.7 million of you who’ve pointed out the Nile River flows
96. 5:17North in that Crash Course World History video.
97. 5:20We know!
98. 5:21That’s why we published the correction in the annotations, which I guess you didn’t
99. 5:26read!
100. 5:27But actually, seriously, thank you for pointing out that mistake.
101. 5:31In response, we issued a correction.
102. 5:33We work hard not to make mistakes or spread inaccuracies, but we don’t always succeed,
103. 5:38and corrections are a way for trustworthy institutions to acknowledge their failures.
104. 5:43Now they aren’t perfect, because of course by the time the correction has been posted
105. 5:47the misinformation has already spread, but what are you going to do?
106. 5:51We’re human.
107. 5:52When very serious corrections are made, sometimes a publication’s editor in chief, public
108. 5:56editor, or ombudsman will step in to explain what went wrong.
109. 6:00Here at Crash Course when those situations arise, we sometimes make separate videos devoted
110. 6:04to the mistake or mistakes and how they came to happen.
111. 6:06Let’s head to the Thought Bubble for some news gathering and corrections.
112. 6:10In 2018 the Drudge Report, a right-wing news aggregation site with a
113. 6:14lot of followers,
114. 6:15tweeted, “REPORT: OBAMA PLEADS WITH JAY-Z TO PREVENT OTHER HIP HOP ARTISTS MEETING WITH
115. 6:21TRUMP” The tweet linked to InfoWars,
116. 6:23a website known for spreading conspiracy theories
117. 6:25that has been banned from social media sites[1] for using hate speech.
118. 6:28And the InfoWars story was based on one Twitter user’s tweet,
119. 6:32which claimed sources said that Obama and Jay Z were discussing this.
120. 6:37But that user is not a journalist,
121. 6:39and though they said the story was “developing,”
122. 6:41they never provided any other evidence for this claim.
123. 6:44But regardless, InfoWars wrote an article about it and Drudge Tweeted it.
124. 6:48But the report did nothing to explain how or if InfoWars had confirmed the story.
125. 6:54In fact, the only evidence they gave was that Donald Trump Jr. had liked the tweet in question.
126. 6:59What I’ve just described is not a reliable or responsible news gathering process.
127. 7:05Nonetheless, At the time we filmed this video
128. 7:08the article was still up on InfoWars with no corrections issued.
129. 7:12For comparison, consider this ProPublica report.
130. 7:15ProPublica is a respected nonprofit newsroom that focuses on investigative journalism.
131. 7:19They published a story in 2017 that said CIA officer Gina Haspel oversaw the secret base
132. 7:25where a suspected Al-Qaeda leader was subject to waterboarding.
133. 7:29That was wrong.
134. 7:30When the publication discovered this mistake, they issued a correction.
135. 7:33In nearly 1,000 words, they explained the error, how it was made, and how they got their
136. 7:38initial information.
137. 7:40That was added to the top of the incorrect story, ensuring that anyone who found that
138. 7:45page would see it.
139. 7:46Thanks, Thought Bubble.
140. 7:47So obviously ProPublica made a big mistake with that article and that mistake did lead
141. 7:51to lots of people being misinformed, some of whom will unfortunately never see the correction.
142. 7:56That’s why it is so important to only try to share verified information.
143. 8:01But the issuing of the correction, and the exploration of how the mistake came to be
144. 8:05made, does allow readers not only to understand that the reporting was wrong, but also how
145. 8:11it came to happen and what changes are being made internally to decrease the likelihood
146. 8:16of such mistakes.
147. 8:18So in addition to varying backgrounds and processes for gathering information, every
148. 8:22source also has its own perspective or point of view.
149. 8:25You’ll notice I am not using the word “bias”.
150. 8:28These days we tend to associate bias with anyone we disagree with.
151. 8:32Like if a sports writer named Steph Curry the best NBA player instead of LeBron James,
152. 8:38a fan might say “She’s so biased against LeBron because he’s so popular.”
153. 8:42But bias means favoring something in a way that’s unfair.
154. 8:45I don’t think everyone unfairly preferences some things over others.
155. 8:50But everyone does wake up each morning with a particular perspective on the world due
156. 8:55to their lived experiences.
157. 8:57Rather than dismiss a source because their background might make them supposedly biased,
158. 9:01use the knowledge you learn about them to understand their perspective.
159. 9:06Consider their reason for sharing that information.
160. 9:09How might their perspective influence what they’re sharing, and how they do it?
161. 9:13Basically, I am proposing a radical idea for the Internet called empathy.
162. 9:17Like take for instance the American Enterprise Institute and the Center for American Progress.
163. 9:22They’re think tanks, or groups of experts that provide analysis and research on various
164. 9:27topics and policies.
165. 9:28Slight sidenote, the term think tank does come from actual tanks.
166. 9:31It originates from military jargon used in WWII to denote a safe place to talk about
167. 9:37strategy.
168. 9:38But right, the American Enterprise Institute is a conservative think tank.
169. 9:41Many of its leaders are well known conservative figures.
170. 9:43The Center for American progress on the other hand is a liberal think tank.
171. 9:47Its similarly tied to well-known liberal figures.
172. 9:50They both clearly have different political perspectives.
173. 9:52But that doesn’t mean we should immediately reject any report or research they release.
174. 9:57We just have to take the perspectives into account when we receive their information,
175. 10:01and consider how it might influence the content they produce.
176. 10:05Perspective extends to other sources too, like news organizations.
177. 10:08Opinion pieces are typically written with a specific perspective by people outside a
178. 10:13news organization.
179. 10:14And when reading an opinion, we should carefully consider that author’s perspective while
180. 10:19examining their arguments.
181. 10:21But one can’t confuse the opinion pages of a newspaper with its reporting, even though
182. 10:26that is really difficult online, because there are no physical “sections” of a newspaper.
183. 10:31But if a piece is marked “Opinion, or “Analysis,” or “Perspective,” or “Viewpoint,”
184. 10:36it is meant to be persuasive, not just informative.
185. 10:39When the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal publishes an opinion piece that is
186. 10:42not their reporting, it’s an opinion.
187. 10:45News articles don’t have that same explicit perspective, but some news websites do have
188. 10:50varying political orientations.
189. 10:52If we’re familiar with an organization’s political tendencies, we can take those into
190. 10:56account when thinking about their work.
191. 10:58For example, take a look at The Daily Kos and the Daily Wire.
192. 11:01The Daily Kos is a hyper-partisan left-leaning website.
193. 11:04How do we know?
194. 11:05If we head to the Masthead page, which lists their staffers, you’ll find they call themselves
195. 11:10a progressive community site.
196. 11:12Also, their founder has written a book explicitly about “fighting” President Trump.
197. 11:17Plus, their coverage often asks readers to take action via signing a petition or protesting
198. 11:21against particular causes, usually in favor of liberal policies.
199. 11:26This tells us their perspective is strong, and it will almost certainly influence how
200. 11:30they present the news.
201. 11:31On the opposite side of the spectrum, the Daily Wire, is a hyper-partisan right-leaning
202. 11:36site.
203. 11:37It describes itself as an “irreverent news and commentary site for a new generation of
204. 11:40conservatives.”
205. 11:42On his YouTube channel, founder Ben Shapiro calls himself a conservative political pundit
206. 11:46and his podcast is described as “savagely irreverent conservative.”
207. 11:50They may not ask their audience to take direct action as frequently, but they’re very clear
208. 11:54on their political bent.
209. 11:55This tells us that their perspective is also strong, and and it will also almost certainly
210. 12:00influence how they present news.
211. 12:02When reading articles from either website, we must take their views into account and
212. 12:06remember they may be presenting information in a way that aligns with their political
213. 12:11beliefs.
214. 12:12And if you think about it, considering other people's perspectives should not feel like
215. 12:15revolutionary because you do it all the time in real life.
216. 12:19When a new Mountain Goats album comes out and I call my brother to tell him that the
217. 12:23most important piece of music in human history has just been released, he knows I am speaking
218. 12:29to him from a particular perspective… a correct one.
219. 12:32He’s not going to dismiss my enthusiasm for the mountain goats’ brilliant lyrics
220. 12:35or artful musical storytelling, but he will dial it back to what a normal person might
221. 12:41think--and maybe even check to see what reviewers thought of the album.
222. 12:44As if Pitchfork knows anything about the Mountain Goats.
223. 12:46I am the world’s leading Mountain Goats expert… is a good example of how not to
224. 12:52act.
225. 12:53That’s what this is all about.
226. 12:54There’s so much information online, both good and bad, that in order to sort through
227. 12:59it all we need to stop, think, and look around.
228. 13:03We read laterally to find out who is behind information.
229. 13:05And then, we seek out specific information about those sources, their authority, and
230. 13:10their perspective.
231. 13:11And each bit of information we get about a source is like a piece of stained glass.
232. 13:16Once it’s all put together, it becomes a lens through which we view their claims and
233. 13:20arguments.
234. 13:21That makes us better at understanding what information is reliable and what information
235. 13:26in turn we should pass on.
236. 13:28Not only to the people who are here now, but to the people who will come after us.
237. 13:32It’s also makes your life more colorful.
238. 13:34We’re going to be diving into a very colorful place next time on Crash Course Navigating
239. 13:38Digital Information… well figuratively colorful…
240. 13:41literally it’s quite black and white -- Wikipedia.
241. 13:44I’ll see you then.
242. 13:51For this series, Crash Course has teamed up with MediaWise, a project out of the Poynter
243. 13:54Institute that was created with support from Google.
244. 13:57The Poynter Institute is a non-profit journalism school.
245. 14:00The goal of MediaWise is to teach students how to assess the accuracy of information
246. 14:04they encounter online.
247. 14:06The MediaWise curriculum was developed by the Stanford History Education Group based
248. 14:10on civic online reasoning research that they began in 2015.
249. 14:12If you’re interested in learning more about MediaWise and fact-checking, you can visit
250. 14:16@mediawise on Instagram.
251. 14:20________________ [1]https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2018/aug/07/why-infowars-alex-jones-was-banned-apple-facebook-/