Both of my parents were educators, and reading was a common pastime in my family. Dad subscribed to U.S. News and World Report, the Los Angeles Times and the Pasadena Star News. When we got a TV, his favorite news provider was Walter Cronkite. For those too young to remember, Cronkite anchored the CBS Evening News in the sixties and seventies and was frequently cited as “the most trusted man in America” (based on opinion polls). He would end each evening’s broadcast with his signature catchphrase – “And that’s the way it is…”. The information we consumed from all of these sources generally agreed, and we trusted that it was reliable.
Those halcyon days of trustworthy news are long gone. Today, surveys show that 90% of us have lost confidence in the information provided by media sources and use some form of fact checking as a result. Digital platforms that enable instantaneous global communication are powerful tools for spreading fake stories and raising doubt. Elections have been influenced, public health has been endangered, and we have become increasingly divided. This rift extends to the media sources we choose, making it even harder for us to agree on even the most basic facts. Without factual information, how can we ever hope to engage in productive debate and reach workable compromise?
Digital Literacy expert Mike Caulfield studies the spread of online misinformation at the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public. Mike suggests that we “sift” the information we consume relentlessly – SIFT is his easy-to-remember acronym for detecting online BS.
We live in a fast-paced world and expect to get answers quickly. News sources shift their focus rapidly, and often ply our emotions in order to gain attention. The sense of urgency created by all this is not beneficial. First reactions often take us in a wrong direction, bypassing analysis and reflection. The first part of SIFT is to Stop and resist the temptation to share, repost, or launch into the comment section. When you are fired up about something you just read, take a breath.
Few of our news and social media feeds provide us with a clear picture of where or by whom they were created. Whether it is a source we follow, or one generated by an algorithm, it is a safe bet that it didn’t originate with Walker Cronkite (feel free to check me on that). The experts advise that we continue the SIFT by Investigating the source of the information.
Search results should always be approached with caution. For example, Wikipedia has its shortcomings, but its crowd-sourced nature often converges to something close to the truth. In general terms, the original creator of the post as well as the reputation of the associated media outlet (if there is one) should be checked. Personal biases, financial connections, political beliefs and subject matter expertise all play important roles. Perhaps the best test of all is this – would you still trust this source if it was saying something that you disagreed with?
A key part of the investigation is to seek alternate and perhaps better sources. For my parents, USNWR (international), LA Times (big city), Star News (local) and Mr. Cronkite (informed commentary) offered different perspectives on the same stories. In order to Find better coverage in the digital age (the next SIFT step), Google Fact Check – which only searches fact-checking websites – is straightforward, although Google does not vet the sites it returns. For that important second step, Poynter's International Fact-Checking Network provides a list of over 160 certified fact checkers, and the principles they agree to adhere to. Snopes, a popular website which I have used, is a member. Both text and images can be traced back to the source and verified.
The final element of SIFT is to Trace the information to its original source. This is basically another element of investigating the source and possibly finding better information. In this step, the original source of the information is identified. If a reliable source got their information somewhere else, they should say so and hopefully even provide a link to the original material. This can help guard against information that may have been taken out of context, or enhanced with a photo that wasn’t chosen by the original author. As an example, election year quotes from candidates are occasionally used out of context.
In this age of online searching and near instant access to information, it can be hard to accept the importance of pausing and working to find the truth. Putting in the extra effort – fine tuning your DIY BS Detector with Mike Caulfield’s SIFT – can avoid embarrassment and spreading information that may lead to serious consequences. The great power of the digital information age also comes with great responsibility.
And that’s the way it is.
Author Profile - Paul W. Smith - leader, educator, technologist, writer - has a lifelong interest in the countless ways that technology changes the course of our journey through life. In addition to being a regular contributor to NetworkDataPedia, he maintains the website Technology for the Journey and occasionally writes for Blogcritics. Paul has over 50 years of experience in research and advanced development for companies ranging from small startups to industry leaders. His other passion is teaching - he is a former Adjunct Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the Colorado School of Mines. Paul holds a doctorate in Applied Mechanics from the California Institute of Technology, as well as Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees in Mechanical Engineering from the University of California, Santa Barbara.
