Friday, May 7, 2021

How to recognize fake news 3

3. Think before you share.

Everybody has a part to play in making sure that false news doesn’t spread, especially when a big story is breaking. Before you pass anything along on one of your social networks, ask yourself these questions:

·       Could someone base an important decision (about their health, their career, travel, etc.) on this?

·       Is this about a hot or controversial issue?

·       Does this seem “too good to be true”?

·       Could people do things that they might regret based on this?

·       Could bad things happen because people thought this was true and it wasn’t?

If the answer to any of these questions is “Yes”, then you may want to do some more digging before you spread the news.

A list of sites that have a good reputation for finding the truth.

FactCheck.org

·       A project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, this organization checks the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases.

Truth or Fiction

·       A non-partisan website where "Internet users can quickly and easily get information about eRumours, fake news, disinformation, warnings, offers, requests for help, myths, hoaxes, virus warnings, and humorous or inspirational stories that are circulated by email."

PolitiFact

·       PolitiFact staffer's research statements and rate their accuracy on the Truth-O-Meter, from True to False. The most ridiculous falsehoods get the lowest rating, Pants on Fire.

Snopes.com

·       This highly regarded rumour analyzing site has been researching rumours since 1995.

Hoax-Slayer

·       Site that debunks email and social media hoaxes and educates web users about email, social media, and Internet security issues. Founded in 2003.

 

 

 

Thursday, May 6, 2021

How to recognize fake news 2

 1. Check out the original source.

Don’t assume that a report is true just because lots of other people have shared it, it’s high in search results or it’s trending on a social network: hoaxers can manipulate these measures to spread their version of the story. Instead, open a new tab to go “upstream” and find the original source. This means finding the link to the original story and then going to the to the original story and evaluate it. Some questions to ask when you get to the source:

Did the story really come from the source listed? Instead of just following a link that might take you to a fake website, do a search for the website (or enter its web address if you know it) to double-check.

Does the source for the news have a good track record for accuracy? Do a search to find out what other people say about the source as well.

 Here are some other sites to help you check if the news is fake:

   Fake Or Real? How To Self-Check The News And Get The Facts

o   A news item from NPR, with tips on how to self-check the news to ensure you're getting a real news story.

  What are Confirmation Bias Examples?

o   "Confirmation bias is the tendency for people to selectively search for and consider information that confirms already held beliefs. People also tend to reject evidence that contradicts their opinions." This page has some examples of confirmation bias.

  The Fact Checker’s guide for detecting fake news

o   Clear and quick tips for how to detect fake news, from the Fact Checker section of the Washington Post: "When you read them [articles], pay attention to the following signs that the article may be fake. There are fake news stories generated by both left-leaning and right-leaning websites, and the same rules apply to both."

2. Double-check photos and videos.

Fake photos and videos are some of the most common kinds of misinformation that go around when a big news story happens. Old photos can get shared sometimes, too. Make sure to double-check that a photo or video is current and for real before you spread it any further.

Do a search for the subject with the word’s “hoax” or “scam”, as in “shark subway station hoax”. Take the time to scan the snippets below each result before you click on one to make sure that it’s relevant to what you’re looking for, and open the results in a new tab so you can get back to your original search easily.

For pictures, you can do a search at TinEye (www.tineye.com ) or use a search engine. That will tell you where else the picture has appeared, and show you pictures that are similar (which is a good way to find out if an image has been manipulated).

You can also search on hoax-busting sites like Snopes. Go to www.snopes.com or do a site search, like this: “shark subway station site: www.snopes.com  ” . 

Wednesday, May 5, 2021

How to recognize fake news 1

The Internet is the greatest information technology ever developed: every minute, four million YouTube videos are viewed, 3.5 million Google searches are performed, and 156 million emails are sent.

The Internet and social media have made it easier for everybody to access, share and publish information, but that has come at a cost: it’s harder than ever to tell the difference between accurate information and advertising, misinformation, and parody, and it’s easy for any of us to help spread false information without meaning to.

Because so many of us turn to online sources for information, authentication (the process of verifying that information is true, unbiased, and relevant) can no longer be something we only preach but do not do, our health, our finances, and even system of government depend on having and sharing good information.

We have to recognize that no news source is unbiased, but some will be more reliable than others. Here are some markers of a reliable news organization:

  Accuracy: If they can’t get the little things right – people’s names, statistics, etc. it’s hard to trust them on the big things.

  Willingness to acknowledge gaps and correct mistakes: Do they admit when they don’t have all the information? When they do make mistakes, do they admit and correct them?

  The separation between opinion and news: Most news outlets have an editorial “slant,” but that shouldn’t affect the news they cover. For instance, if the editorial generally supports one political viewpoint, does the news still cover stories that could offer a contrary perspective?

  Identification of sources: While legitimate news outlets do sometimes use anonymous sources, most of the time sources should be identified. When statistics are given, it should be possible to follow them upstream to their source as well.

How do you determine if a news story is real or fake? It is not easy, but there is help. In a 2016 story,  "How To Recognize A Fake News Story" by Nick Robins-EarlyHuffington Post, Nov. 22, 2016, the author posted the following picture. To read the whole story and more information on the list provided go to:  How to Recognize a Fake News Story (Huffington Post)



There are some other ideas to help you in the next post

 

Tuesday, May 4, 2021

Zoom fatigue is real

 The following is from the tomorrows-professor mailing list.

Prompted by the recent boom in videoconferencing, communication Professor Jeremy Bailenson, founding director of the Stanford Virtual Human Interaction Lab <https://vhil.stanford.edu/ > (VHIL), examined the psychological consequences of spending hours per day on these platforms.

Just as “Googling” is something akin to any web search, the term “Zooming” has become ubiquitous and a generic verb to replace videoconferencing. Virtual meetings have skyrocketed, with hundreds of millions happening daily, as social distancing protocols have kept people apart physically. In the first peer-reviewed article that systematically deconstructs Zoom fatigue from a psychological perspective, published in the journal Technology, Mind and Behavior <https://tmb.apaopen.o rg/pub/nonverbal-overload/> on Feb. 23, Bailenson has taken the medium apart and assessed Zoom on its individual technical aspects.

He has identified four consequences of prolonged video chats that he says contribute to the feeling commonly known as “Zoom fatigue”. Bailenson stressed that his goal is not to vilify any videoconferencing platform he appreciates and uses tools like Zoom regularly but to highlight how current implementations of videoconferencing technologies are exhausting and to suggest interface changes, many of which are simple to implement.

Moreover, he provides suggestions for consumers and organizations on how to leverage the current features on videoconferences to decrease fatigue. Videoconferencing is a good thing for remote communication, but just think about the medium just because you can use video doesn’t mean you have to, Bailenson said. Below are four primary reasons why video chats fatigue humans, according to the study.

Four reasons why video chats fatigue humans:

1) Excessive amounts of close-up eye contact are highly intense.

Both the amount of eye contact we engage in on video chats, as well as the size of faces on screens is unnatural. In a normal meeting, people will variously be looking at the speaker, taking notes or looking elsewhere. But on Zoom calls, everyone is looking at everyone, all the time. A listener is treated nonverbally like a speaker, so even if you don t speak once in a meeting, you are still looking at faces staring at you. The amount of eye contact is dramatically increased.

a. Social anxiety of public speaking is one of the biggest phobias that exist in our population, Bailenson said. When you’re standing up there and everybody’s staring at you, that’s a stressful experience.

b. Another source of stress is that depending on your monitor size and whether you’re using an external monitor, faces on videoconferencing calls can appear too large for comfort. In general, for most setups, if it’s a one-on-one conversation when you’re with coworkers or even strangers on video, you’re seeing their face at a size that simulates a personal space that you normally experience when you’re with somebody intimately, Bailenson said. When someone s face is that close to ours in real life, our brains interpret it as an intense situation that is either going to lead to mating or to conflict. What s happening, in effect, when you’re using Zoom for many, many hours is you’re in this hyper-aroused state, Bailenson said.

c. Solution: Until the platforms change their interface, Bailenson recommends taking Zoom out of the full-screen option and reducing the size of the Zoom window relative to the monitor to minimize face size, and to use an external keyboard to allow an increase in the personal space bubble between oneself and the grid.

2) Seeing yourself during video chats constantly in real-time is fatiguing. Most video platforms show a square of what you look like on camera during a chat. But that s unnatural, Bailenson said. In the real world, if somebody were following you around with a mirror constantly so that while you were talking to people, making decisions, giving feedback, getting the feedback you were seeing yourself in a mirror, that would just be crazy.

a. No one would ever consider that, he added. Bailenson cited studies showing that when you see a reflection of yourself, you are more critical of yourself. Many of us are now seeing ourselves on video chats for many hours every day. It’s taxing on us. It’s stressful. And there’s lots of research showing that there are negative emotional consequences to seeing yourself in a mirror.

Solution: Bailenson recommends that platforms change the default practice of beaming the video to both self and others when it only needs to be sent to others. In the meantime, users should use the hide self-view button, which one can access by right-clicking their own photo, once they see their face is framed properly in the video.

3) Video chats dramatically reduce our usual mobility.

In-person and audio phone conversations allow humans to walk around and move. But with videoconferencing, most cameras have a set field of view, meaning a person has to generally stay in the same spot. Movement is limited in ways that are not natural. There’s growing research now that says when people are moving, they’re performing better cognitively, Bailenson said.

Solution: Bailenson recommends people think more about the room they’re videoconferencing in, where the camera is positioned and whether things like an external keyboard can help create distance or flexibility.

For example, an external camera farther away from the screen will allow you to pace and doodle in virtual meetings just like we do in real ones. And of course, turning one’s video off periodically during meetings is a good ground rule to set for groups, just to give oneself a brief nonverbal rest.

4) The cognitive load is much higher in video chats. Bailenson notes that in regular face-to-face interaction, nonverbal communication is quite natural and each of us naturally makes and interprets gestures and nonverbal cues subconsciously.

a. But in video chats, we must work harder to send and receive signals. In effect, Bailenson said, humans have taken one of the most natural things in the world an in-person conversation and transformed it into something that involves a lot of thought: You’ve got to make sure that your head is framed within the center of the video.

b. If you want to show someone that you are agreeing with them, you have to do an exaggerated nod or put your thumbs up. That adds cognitive load as you’re using mental calories to communicate.

c. Gestures could also mean different things in a video meeting context. A sidelong glance to someone during an in-person meeting means something very different than a person on a video chat grid looking off-screen to their child who just walked into their home office.

Solution: During long stretches of meetings, give yourself an audio-only break. This is not simply you turning off your camera to take a break from having to be nonverbally active, but also turning your body away from the screen, Bailenson said, so that for a few minutes you are not smothered with gestures that are perceptually realistic but socially meaningless.

We have to evolve ways to make it work for us. We're in that era now with video conferencing, and understanding the mechanisms will help us understand the optimal way to do things for different settings, different organizations, and different kinds of meetings. If you are interested in measuring your own Zoom fatigue, you can take the survey here<https://comm.stanford.edu /ZEF> and participate in the research project.