Lauren Elizabeth P.
Moderator Pick
Fighting a Stigma
I do my best to skim the surface of news sources from across the entire spectrum. As I do this I try to pay attention to the types of ads that are on each site, the ways that their articles are displayed, and the general tone (shock jock vs neutral) to get a general topical and visual idea of what the news looks like. This sets a sort of rubric for interactions that I have with patrons throughout the day. I know to expect both extremes, and do my best to keep a balance between agreed upon facts, and the tiers of rumors mixing with opinions that eventually spirals out into disinformation. I interact with a lot of patrons who use social media as their primary source of information. When it's appropriate, I initiate conversations about online safety, and machine logic to discuss behavior. This works with adults and teens to help explain things like when people's facebooks get hacked by Lululemon, or when peoples phones seem to be listening to them.
I'm always trying to site sources conversationally; 'where'd they hear that?' 'I glazed a headline on ... that said...', 'cnn alleges that...'. this reminds me to assess my sources more frequently.
While I try to stay within sources that I encounter and trust professionally, members of the community that I work in access information that lies outside of this wheelhouse.
I wonder if librarians' role is to help our communities de-stigmatize the contexts surrounding news sources. Maybe it's to engage people with information from across an appropriate information spectrum.
(2) |
Comments (3)
I am in administration now so I have lost touch with those reference desk interactions so I appreciate your perspective! My opinions on "disinformation" come from lots of reading on the subject but having a current perspective from patron interactions is great.
Hi Lauren Elizabeth and Hanna:
There is so much to discuss in your comments! I'm intrigued to know how you determine "when it's appropriate" to initiate conversations about online safety.
I also like the idea of de-stigmatizing the contexts around news stories. That feels like a first step toward restoring civil discourse that could lead to a greater understanding.
Not validating but not condemning conspiracy theories also feels like a huge challenge.
I look forward to much more conversation about all of this.
Interesting thoughts. I have a hard time balancing awareness of news sources across the political spectrum with not validating conspiracy theories and really harmful beliefs and takes. How can librarians not validate such ideas, but also not condemn them so much that their believers turn away from us?
I do really agree that everyone, regardless of political beliefs, would be helped by having a better awareness of what others are reading and believing. In my own ventures into more right-leaning media, I have come across some common concerns and critiques that surprised me (even as many were grounded in an unrealistic understanding of history, and had different solutions). Perhaps recognizing the many reasons people read the news, that it is not a definitive statement on one's own values and beliefs, but rather just information gathering would be a useful practice and attitude to take.