• En Seine-Saint-Denis, les services publics à la merci de la fracture numérique | Rémi Simonet

    Ces dernières années, de nombreux habitants de Seine-Saint-Denis se heurtent à une dématérialisation massive des services publics. Dans le département le plus pauvre de France, les travailleurs sociaux s’alarment d’une fracture numérique qui risque de creuser davantage les inégalités sociales. Une enquête du Bondy Blog pour Médiapart. Source : Bondy Blog

  • danah boyd: How Critical Thinking and Media Literacy Efforts Are ‘Backfiring’ Today | EdSurge News

    Keynote par danah boyd à SXSW 2018

    Few would challenge the value of helping students develop critical thinking and information literacy. But if such skills are encouraged simply as a reactionary means to challenge knowledge, says danah boyd, the future may look even more chaotic and grim.

    Speaking at the morning keynote on the third day of SXSW EDU, boyd, a researcher at Microsoft and the founder and president of Data & Society, offered this provocative observation: “Many of the forms of critical thinking that we’ve introduced into American education are backfiring right now.”

    Touching on matters ranging from Russian propaganda efforts to Netflix, history to philosophy, boyd’s intellectually provocative talk raised plenty of deep questions around media and manipulation. But she also admitted there are few clear solutions.

    Educational groups, from Common Sense Media to PBS, have introduced online curricula designed to help teachers teach the topic. Often these tools include lessons on checking facts and analyzing sources for biases.

    Yet these exercises, while valuable, can perpetuate an even bigger problem if framed in the wrong context. “Right now, the conversation around fact checking has devolved to suggest that there is only one truth. We have to recognize that there are plenty of students who are taught that there is only one legitimate way of thinking, one accepted worldview,” boyd said.

    “Funders, journalists, social media companies and elected officials all say they want a ‘media literacy solution.’ I don’t know what it is, [but] I hope it’s not a version that’s just CNN versus Fox News,” she added.

    By describing the goal of media literacy as a way to discover the truth, adults may actually reinforce the message that there is only one explanation, a strict, black-and-white line between what’s right and wrong. That thinking generally does not sit well for adolescents and young adults, who may be naturally inclined to challenge authority and seek alternative explanations, said boyd.

    “Many people especially young people turn to online communities to make sense of the world around them. They want to ask uncomfortable questions, interrogate assumptions and poke holes at things they’ve learned,” she said. “But there are some questions that we’ve told them are unacceptable to ask in public.” In response, they’ve taken to online forums, some of which “have popped up to encourage people to go down certain paths of thinking—some of them being deeply extreme” in their views.

    #Fake_news #Litteratie_numérique #danah_boyd

  • Fake news. It’s complicated. - First Draft News

    By now we’ve all agreed the term “fake news” is unhelpful, but without an alternative, we’re left awkwardly using air quotes whenever we utter the phrase. The reason we’re struggling with a replacement is because this is about more than news, it’s about the entire information ecosystem. And the term fake doesn’t begin to describe the complexity of the different types of misinformation (the inadvertent sharing of false information) and disinformation (the deliberate creation and sharing of information known to be false).

    To understand the current information ecosystem, we need to break down three elements:

    The different types of content that are being created and shared
    The motivations of those who create this content
    The ways this content is being disseminated

    Previous attempts to influence public opinion relied on ‘one-to-many’ broadcast technologies but, social networks allow ‘atoms’ of propaganda to be directly targeted at users who are more likely to accept and share a particular message. Once they inadvertently share a misleading or fabricated article, image, video or meme, the next person who sees it in their social feed probably trusts the original poster, and goes on to share it themselves. These ‘atoms’ then rocket through the information ecosystem at high speed powered by trusted peer-to-peer networks.

    This is far more worrying than fake news sites created by profit driven Macedonian teenagers.

    Absolument. C’est cette logique de la rediffusion qui est centrale dans la place que jouent les médias sociaux dans le nouvel individualisme autoritaire.

    They understand that we’re much less likely to be critical of visuals. We’re much less likely to be critical of information that supports our existing beliefs. And, as information overload exhausts our brains, we’re much easier to influence.

    We all play a crucial part in this ecosystem. Every time we passively accept information without double-checking, or share a post, image or video before we’ve verified it, we’re adding to the noise and confusion. The ecosystem is now so polluted, we have to take responsibility for independently checking what we see online.

    C’est typiquement américain cette manière de faire porter la responsabilité sur les individus... mais en l’occurrence, c’est certainement la première voie importante :
    Ne jamais faire circuler une information avant le l’avoir lue.

    Craig Silverman was a guest on the “On The Media” radio show and talked about the need for emotional skepticism. I couldn’t agree more. This isn’t just about funding more news literacy projects, this is about teaching people to second guess their instinctual reactions. If you find yourself incredibly angry at a piece of content or feeling smug (because your viewpoint has been reaffirmed), take another look.

    #fake_news #post-truth #litteratie_numerique

  • #citylis Reflections and Research: Why LIS doesn’t have a quick fix for the post-factual society … and why that’s OK by David Bawden | CityLIS News – Library & Information Science at City, University of London

    The irony is that by now it was supposed to be perfect. For most of my working life in the library/information area, first as a practitioner and then as an academic, the emphasis was on providing access to information. Most of the time, whatever the topic, there was never enough information, and accessing what there was could be difficult. Then came the web, Google, Wikipedia, social media, mobile information, open access, and the rest. So that now, we should be living in an information nirvana, where we have ready access to all the information we could need, for any purpose. And indeed, to an extent, that is what we have.

    But we also have, as Luciano Floridi has pointed out, a situation where we can carry a device in our pocket which gives us access to the accumulated knowledge of humanity; and we mostly use it to send each other pictures of cats, and to have arguments with people we don’t know. [Not that I object at all to pictures of cats, but you get the idea.] More seriously, we have fake news, alternative facts, a post-truth and post-factual society, filter bubbles, and all the other accompaniments of what seems to be a deliberate retreat from the rational, knowledge-based world that many of us believed we were naturally headed for.

    Information access? Yes, that’s good, on the whole, But, alas, we can see that misinformation and disinformation proliferates just as well as valid information. I was particularly struck by seeing this unfold in the Twitter responses to the Quebec shootings of 29th January, with false information repeated and embellished to meet the need for facts to suit pre-determined conclusions. Over fifteen years ago, Lyn Robinson and I argued, in a paper on libraries and open society, that providing a ‘free flow of information’, with access to all available and relevant sources, is necessary but not sufficient to support an open and democratic society. While only this month, a paper in The Information Society argues cogently that providing access to the ‘right’ information does not in itself bring about desirable policy outcomes. It’s also worth remembering that one of the few things that have been established beyond doubt by several decades of information behaviour research is that everyone – academics and politicians included – deal with information through satisficing and the principle of least effort. And what could involve less effort – physical, technical and mental – than getting from Twitter and Facebook a selection of news and information recommended to fit in with your prior beliefs.

    So, what should we, the LIS profession and discipline, do now? I have no convincing answer; at least not one that offers an immediate quick-fix. Certainly, it will involve a combination of carrying on with our information access/literacy work, plus activities on a wider canvas, with a specific ethical commitment to opposing the post-fact/post-truth nexus. As Georgina Cronin says, in her wide-ranging analysis of what librarians can do in a post-truth society: “Educate. Vote. Protest. Whatever it is, do it”.

    Perhaps one specific, and important, role for LIS, actually quite a traditional one, is to keep the information environment, or that part of it which may be to a degree under our influence if not control, in a clean, tidy and welcoming state. This will involve a variety of activities, from reporting abuse on social media, to helping to remove fake news, to adding citations to Wikipedia, and much more. In the new information environment this process, which Floridi has dubbed the moral duty to both clean and to restore the infosphere to a proper ethical status, is both very difficult and very important.

    #post-truth #bibliothèques #litteratie_numérique

    • Sociétalement, on vient de se gaver d’ordinateurs (jusqu’à en mettre dans nos poches, ouais, de vrais ordis avec option téléphone !) et de numérique, et là les plus gros marchands de chocolat/maquillage/séries se sont gavés sur notre dos en nous fourguant un truc sucré, gras et qui nous laisse parfois l’estomac au bord des lèvres.

      Mais on commence tout juste, et il est encore temps d’apprendre à devenir gourmet, à savoir se maquiller avec finesse, et même à écrire une fan fiction autour de cette nouvelle série.


      C’est quand même triste que tous ces constats sur le déferlement numérique et son lien avec la marchandisation des nos interactions ne conduisent qu’à cerner un nouveau segment de marché...