Facts & Misinformation

One of the major benefits of modern technology is that students now have access to the combined knowledge of our species at their fingertips. 

The information is out there, but finding what is useful and accurate can be like finding a needle in a haystack at times. 

Unbiased, Accurate & Truthful

Access to the sum total of human knowledge does have a major limitation - anyone can post anything they like online, whether it is true or not. 

A major task for a student researching any topic is to identify whether the information they are using comes from a reliable, unbiased source. It is this that forms a key skill in research. 

Bias is our perception of the way things are or should be, even if it's not accurate. Humans show bias when we assume that something is one way based on our experiences or beliefs. Biased language can be used to highlight a point of view and persuade someone to agree with it.

The person or organisation sharing the information might be trying to persuade people that their view is correct, but may not present all the evidence or information that contradicts their viewpoint, or even be lying in order to get your support). 

So how do we spot bias online? 

Key things to look for when considering if a source is biased, is to decide if the the source

• Is heavily opinionated or one-sided

• Relies on unsupported or unsubstantiated claims

• Presents highly selected facts that lean to a certain outcome

• Pretends to present facts, but offers only opinion

• Uses extreme or inappropriate language

• Tries to persuade you to think a certain way with no regard for factual evidence

• The author is unidentifiable, lacks expertise, or writes on unrelated topics

• Is entertainment-based or a form of parody or satire

• Tries to sell you something in disguise

Note - Not all of these have to be present for a source to be biased, that is what makes spotting bias online difficult. 

The videos below show information on how to spot misleading information online:-

Misleading Reporting Case Study : News Group Comparison

The two images below are headlines from two different news groups, with identifying elements removed from each. The headlines both refer to the same story, a petition against a new 20 m.p.h. speed limit across Wales. 

Even though both of these headlines and opening statements contain the same basic factual content (new speed limit, over 100,000 signatures on a petition against it), the method of reporting is vastly different : 

Do you feel that these are both unbiased reporting ? 

If not, why not ? 

Misleading Reporting Case Study : Click-Bait

Sometimes, reporting can be done in a way to encourage people to read an article, or click on a link to a site, this is known as 'click-bait'. An example of this can be seen in the following headline from the British newspaper, The Daily Mirror : 

This headline is a good example of 'click-bait', it draws the reader in by using language to manipulate the reader into jumping to a false conclusion. 

None of the statistics in the article are wrong, the averages calculated for the UK would indeed change without Scotland's data being included. The article also finishes by explicitly stating that the weather won't actually change if the political boundaries of the UK changed. 

However, the implication of the headline is that somehow the presence of Scotland alters the weather, which makes this misleading reporting. 

Spotting Bias : Lateral Reading

When deciding if a source is giving unbiased and accurate information, Lateral Reading is a good technique to use. Lateral reading is when you look outside of your source to seek additional information about a source's credibility, reputation, funding sources, and biases. This will help you make an informed decision on whether to trust a source or not. 

The four videos below show a guide to Lateral Reading:-

Bias, Accuracy & Truth in Scientific Publications : Peer-Review

One of the key methods in Science to avoid bias, and make sure your work is accurate and correct, is through Peer-Review. 

Scientists across the world form a scientific community. For scientists, their peers are other scientists. In When a Scientific paper is Peer-Reviewed, conclusions from new scientific research are checked by other scientists, who check the method used, the accuracy of the results and the conclusions drawn. Scientists also check that the research is valid and original.

In doing this, scientists help to make sure that bias has been avoided. This helps other scientists and non-scientists across the world have confidence in what they are reading or are being told about. 

The video below shows how Peer-Review makes scientific papers more trustworthy:-

Unbiased, Accurate & Truthful Case Study : News Media

The infographic below shows how news media in the UK can be viewed in terms of accurate, unbiased reporting:-

But is this infographic itself unbiased, accurate & truthful? 

If we apply the Lateral Reading technique to this infographic, we find the following:- 

1. Investigate the Source :  

• This infographic was created by Ad Fontes Media, a public benefit corporation founded in 2018. The stated aim of Ad Fontes Media is "to rate all the news to positively transform society...to rate the news for reliability and bias...". 

• Ad Fontes Media is funded by crowd funding, as well as several Venture Capital groups, but none which have a link to the media.  

2. Find the original Source : Ad Fontes Media uses the following method to gather data -  Each individual article and episode is rated by at least three human analysts with balanced right, left, and center self-reported political viewpoints. Analysts first read each article and rate them on their own, then compare scores. If there are differences in the scores, they discuss and adjust scores if necessary. The three analysts’ ratings are averaged to produce the overall article rating. 

3. Look for trusted work :  

• The data produced by Ad Fontes Media has been cited ~250 times in peer-reviewed journals, according to Google Scholar. 

• The data produced by Ad Fontes Media is used by (who are therefore treating it as correct) by several large well known companies, for example Meta (the parent company of Facebook).

• However, a Columbia Journalism Review article questioned the thoroughness of the Media Bias Chart and similar initiatives, stating that "the five to 20 stories typically judged on these sites represent but a drop of mainstream news outlets' production".

• Also, an article on the Association of College and Research Libraries' blog argued that the Media Bias Chart is detrimental to media literacy efforts because it "promotes a false equivalency between left and right, lionizes a political 'center' as being without bias, and reinforces harmful perceptions about what constitutes 'news' in our media ecosystem, and is ignored by anyone that doesn't already hold a comparable view of the media landscape."

Questions to ask about the gathered Lateral Reading : 

• Do we feel that the fact this is a public benefit company, as well as its open public funding and no media-linked funding is a good indicator that this source would not be biased? 

• Do we feel that the method used to generate the data is transparent and by allowing people of different viewpoint to come to a consensus, do we feel it is a good enough method?  

• Does the fact that it has been cited by a large number of peer-reviewed journals outweigh the issues raised by a minority of other publications?