Digital Media Literacy

  • Fake It to Make It: Understanding the Spread of Misinformation

    News Literacy Project’s RumorGuard is a great tool to learn how to identify misinformation on social media. The site shows example social media posts and breaks down different aspects of the post that the user can identify as being falsified information. News Literacy Project identifies five key aspects to be aware of to protect yourself from misinformation: authenticity, source, evidence, context, and reasoning. They also go through different topics and themes of misinformation such as copypasta, doctored photos, and confirmation bias.

    News Literacy Project provides a lot of great tools and information for someone to protect themselves against misinformation. But sometimes, we learn best by doing things for ourselves. I tried my hand at the game Fake It to Make It, a simulation game where you create your own fake news company to spread misinformation! How fun!

    In the game, you “plant” articles in various social media groups to gain traction and create profits. There are different aspects of articles that can boost your reach, such as credibility, drama, and tagging based on the article’s themes and content. It gets more difficult once you have to write your own articles, adding different tags impact the articles credibility and drama. The game became very hard once it prompted me to create a “viral” article.

    To go viral, your article needs to be dramatic and credible. After carefully going through all of the different tags and sources to create the most drama credibility I could for my article, I was still unable to make the article go viral.

    It feels strange to play a game where the goal is the opposite of what your instinct want you to do. Getting a pop-up congratulating me on an article that increased hate crimes is not something I was particularly happy to see.

    However, I believe that’s the point of a game like this. People who deliberately spread misinformation that actively hurts others in order to create a profit or push a certain agenda is a heinous activity. Knowing how these people work makes it easier to spot misinformation in the wild. It was easy to add tags that were inflammatory and instigated negative responses. At some point the game prompted me to plant an article that triggers happiness. Obviously, I went with an article about cute kittens, but it only got 5.

    Personally, I know I’m a hands on learner. Sometimes, I just need to try things out for myself in order to fully understand something. I think playing games like this is extremely beneficial to better understand how it happens. It’s also much easier to get others interested in a game where you purposefully spread misinformation rather than reading articles about the same topic.  

  • Media Diary – March 28, 2025

    I tracked my media usage yesterday, in particular, to pay attention to any misinformation that I may have encountered. I chose to track this day in particular because I knew it would be a long day for me, which meant I would have a higher chance of encountering misinformation.

    5–5:30 am—I don’t tend to check my phone in the early morning unless someone is trying to contact me. So, the first piece of media I tend to consume in the morning is music. I usually put on a personal Spotify-generated playlist unless I’m in the mood to listen to something specific. Today, it was Spotify’s Sister of Mercy mix.

    1–2:30 pm—I had to run some errands after work. I struggled to find what I needed and ended up driving all over town! I again listened to another Spotify-generated playlist, this time for Type-O Negative.

    3-3:30 – Once home, I had no motivation to do anything! I took a quick nap and then doom scrolled through TikTok. There is one creator I enjoy watching; she goes by Sriracha and typically posts silly videos. Well, Sriracha posted about the journalist Jeffrey Goldberg, who was added to the Signal group chat about the bombing of Yemen. Mainly, she discussed the hypocrisy of how this situation is handled compared to other past scandals, such as Hilary Clinton’s emails or Nixon’s Watergate scandal.

    Warning she does curse excessively in the video.

    After reading the initial article, the only misinformation I could specifically gather was that she identified JD Vance as the one to add Goldberg to the group chat when in his article, it was listed as Michael Waltz.

    After watching her video, I immediately trusted her. I think I was inclined to trust her because she doesn’t make informative content. Still, that video was not explicitly informative; she shared her opinion of the situation more. In the future, I will trust that she has an idea of what’s going on but I don’t think she shares information in a way that is meant to or should inform others.

    I tend to scroll past longer and more serious content from unfamiliar creators unless something fascinating happens initially. I did try to pay more attention to content that I usually skip. I came across a video that made me question how reliable the information is. The creator, Jess B, posted a video of “The Most Dangerous Alt-Right Rabbit Holes for Women.” She speeds through different trends and how they can lead someone to a highly conservative group. She does preface the video by saying that it’s not necessarily a direct pipeline. However, it is likely.

    @jessbritvich

    @Jess B The alt-right promises yong (white) men power, the alt-right promises young women oppression #progressivetiktok #leftisttiktok #altrightpipeline #altrightpipelinebelike #trumpisadisgrace #trumpism #tradwifecontroversy

    ♬ original sound – Jess B

    The creator did not provide any sources, and some of her words seem incredibly exaggerated. For instance, claiming that “Skinny Tok” and diet culture could potentially lead someone to eugenics. However, after looking it up, nutrition and eugenics have a long-standing relationship.

    However, this content creator did not just post this video; she responded to herself.  The original video was of her showing off her outfit with text that read:

    “If we don’t want to lose Gen Z women to the alt-right, we need to increase media literacy around online trends that can subtly lead to extremist ideologies. Just as Gen z men were indoctrinated by right-wing influencers and alpha male podcasters, women are more likely to encounter these ideas through homesteading & trad wife content, “clean” everything and wellness culture, stepping into your “feminine,” and conspirituality. These trends aren’t inherently right-wing, but without critical awareness, they can become gateways to the alt-right and we can’t ignore them just because they look softer on the surface.”

    After looking more at her page, Jess claims that her content is focused on “the intersection of trends, internet culture, and politics and how it relates to mainly gen z and millennials.” She also lists in her bio that she’s been in R29, The Knot, and Business Insider. All signs point to show that she can be trusted. However, I will probably continue skipping more serious content from unknown creators. Mainly because it’s not the kind of entertainment I am looking for on TikTok.

    3:30–5 pm – Still trying to recover from my shift this morning, I read some of my book. Currently, I’m reading Castle in the Air by Diana Wynne Jones. It’s a companion to another book of hers, Howl’s Moving Castle!

    5:30 pm—I finally decided to check in on school. I briefly glanced at my email and saw nothing of importance. I only regularly check my school email and only check my personal email if I’m expecting something.

    6–7:30 pm: Before dinner, I played video games with my fiancé, mainly Mario Kart 8 and Super Smash Bros.  

    9 pm-11 pm—Finally, we watched the new episode of RuPaul’s Drag Race and the after-show, RuPaul’s Drag Race: Untucked. The show airs at 8 pm, but since we watched it through YouTube TV, we could start it later and skip through all the commercials.

    Overall, I do a pretty good job of avoiding misinformation daily. The only reason I do is my ADHD. I have zero interest in looking at any content that is unfamiliar to me or not immediately of interest to me.

  • Reddit Blackout: Who owns our discussions?

    I am relatively new to using Reddit. Before I had an actual account, I still sought out Reddit threads because I thought that its users had valuable information that I couldn’t get at other places. As someone who does various fiber arts crafts, I found Reddit to be a wealth of information, with many users explaining different and new techniques. One of my biggest faults is that I’m incredibly impatient, therefore I’d much rather read a reddit comment about how to change colors while crocheting than watch a 3-minute-long video. However, you can only see so much without an actual account.

     So, I bit the bullet and created an account, just before the Reddit Blackout of 2023. I was barely getting used to the site before the subreddits I had become so attached to went dark. As a new user, I had no idea of all the different apps that people were using to be able to access their favorite forums. Reddit had announced that third-party apps would have to pay for their data.

    Why is this an issue?

    It’s an issue because third-party apps are essential for many users to be able to access Reddit. Many disabled users turn to other apps to access the site because they offer better accessibility than Reddit’s app. If third-party apps must pay for data, it would potentially end them or require users to pay for those additional apps, which would severely limit access to disable folk.

    Additionally, moderators use third-party apps to more easily monitor their subreddits. Moderators are volunteers, many of whom would not have the time or ability to moderate without the help of third-party apps. Without them, subreddits would not have the structure that we’ve grown accustomed to.

    And thus, we have the blackout.

    The blackout was an online form of protest, users opted out of posting online to prevent the company from generating income. Unfortunately, it wasn’t entirely successful. Many third-party developers were forced to shut down. Although Reddit did commit to not charging third-party developers for their accessibility tools.

    However, this blackout asks the question: Who owns our conversation?

    I follow subreddits such as r/crochet and r/embroidery, I love seeing all the creativity of the users, sharing the most creative and interesting pieces of art. However, I also follow many subreddits about books. Although this blog is centered around digital media literacy, I’m an English major at ASU with a passion for literature.

    I frequently visit subreddits such as r/52book , r/suggestmeabook, and r/bookclub, but I also search through a many other literature based subreddits. I love discussing books and delving deep into hidden meanings and other things that could have been missed. I also visit them quite frequently when I’m reading a required text for a class. I frequently visit these sites to remind me things that happened in a book, or to find something that I may have missed. Being that my school is online, I find that these discussions simulate those I miss in the classroom.

    But do these discussions belong to the users or the hosting website?

    Theoretically, I don’t believe that anyone can “own” your discussions. Although they may be physical (in a sense that they are written down), they’re still our ideas and thoughts. Discussions are more than just written words, it’s a conversation you have with others. It’s an experience, and nobody can own your experience. Even if a website “owns” your discussions, they don’t own the experience you had and what you learned, nobody can take that away from us.

  • Using AI to Generate Text

    ChatGPT and other AI tools are used all the time to generate text. The high school my fiance works at encourages teachers to utilize ChatGPT in lesson plans, yet students are constantly being forbidden from using AI text generation for assignments. As a student, I understand why. AI isn’t perfect and students need to be expressing what they’ve learned, which we cannot do if we upload an assignment to an AI program.

    I decided to try it myself. I prompted ChatGPT to create a blog post for me. I asked it to explain why Trump chose his cabinet picks for his second administration. I was curious as to what kind of reasoning it would provide for some of his more outlandish choices. However, I was extremely disappointed. 

    ChatGPT framed it’s response as to what it would assume Trump would pick if he were to be elected again, and the nominees were based on prior cabinet members. But unfortunately, Trump did win and his cabinet picks are worse than we could have imagined. I put ChatGPT’s response into a Google Doc so I could edit it. The introduction and conclusion were very general and didn’t need much fixing other than the tense of some words. However, the bulk of the post required a decent amount of fixing. Aside from changing names and removing the secondary assumptions, some of the picks did not carry the same qualifications as what ChatGPT had suggested. 

    ChatGPT's response to my prompt

    Using ChatGPT to generate a post made it painfully obvious that it was AI generated. It took more time and effort to correct the text than it would be to write my own, and less enjoyable. I would have much preferred to talk about the horrible picks such as Elon Musk, Dr. Oz, or Linda McMahon. 

    And let this serve as a reminder, to NEVER use AI to complete a school or professional assignment. ChatGPT was so incredibly wrong in it’s generated text that it would make it obviously false to anyone who read it. And even if you did decide to use and edit it, that is way too much work.I still may play around with AI and see what it can do, but my use will remain recreational. I have used ChatGPT in the past to summarize a text, but after this experiment I will not be doing that again.

  • Editing Wikipedia

    This week I worked on editing a Wikipedia page, which ended up being much more difficult than I had imagined, yet easier than I thought

    I would assume that most people are familiar with Wikipedia. It’s touted as an unreliable source, yet I always find it to be amongst the top when searching for something online. And typically, these pages can be quite insightful, with a massive amount of information. I know I frequently turn to Wikipedia because it’s provides a comprehensive explanation about a topic. I’m more likely to look at a Wikipedia page to get a general understanding before doing some more research to get further detail.

    When thinking about what page I’d like to edit, I had some difficulty but came up with some good ideas, or so I thought. My original idea was to add someone to my hometown’s notable people list. I went to highschool with Kariselle Snow, an influencer who has been on dating shows such as MTV’s Are You The One and Netflix’s Sexy Beast and Perfect Match. Additionally, she participated in the Miss America pageants and was a cheerleader for the Baltimore Ravens. However, it was difficult to find sources that weren’t online gossip mills about the shows. I was forced to look elsewhere. Rachel Harrison, who wrote books such as Cackle and Such Sharp Teeth went to highschool with my fiance. However, I was unable to find substantial proof that she actually went to school there. Unfortunately, I can’t cite personal yearbooks on Wikipedia.

    I decided I need to think a bit smaller and broader. Finally, with some inspiration from my fiance, I stumbled upon a Wikipedia page that hosted a list of skateparks throughout the world. I finally found something I could add! Skateparks in the United States were categorized by state, and none were listed for my home state of New Jersey. Perfect!

    Screenshot of Wikipedia's list of skateparks without New Jersey

    I searched through NJGrind and GoSkate for a list of skateparks based on my location. There was a lot… Too many for me to feel comfortable with adding to this Wikipedia page. I enlisted my fiance’s assistance once again, as he is someone who regularly visits various skateparks around the state.

    So, instead of adding 20+ different parks to Wikipedia, I added some that were important to the community. Or at least according to him. Once I finally knew what I wanted to add it was pretty easy. Using the visual editor I could clearly see what I was doing. I was just typing onto the page, adding hyperlinks and citations was really easy. And I had little difficulty finding sources, as most of these parks were recently renovated and featured in papers. And ones that I could not find sources for had pages dedicated to them through their municipality.

    Now, Wikipedia has five parks listed on their list of skateparks in New Jersey!

    Highlighting my additions to Wikipedia's list of skateparks.

    Overall, editing a Wikipedia page was not as difficult as I ever though it would be. My experience in the processes makes me for confident in trusting the information provided on various pages. And although I will never use it to cite in an academic paper, I think it’s a great place to get a quick and comprehensive overview of a topic before diving into it. And next time I notice something missing from a Wikipedia page I won’t be afraid to add it in!