wescottc_HUM101_mod5

docx

School

Colorado State University, Global Campus *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

101

Subject

Arts Humanities

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

6

Uploaded by CorporalDragon2858

Report
Module 5: Critical Thinking Media Literacy and Contemporary Manifestations of Media Bias Chad Wescott Colorado State University Global HUM101-2 Critical Reasoning Dr. Katherine Olson 19 August 2022 1
2 Media Source For this critical thinking assignment I selected two similar editorials posted just weeks apart. The first one is from NPR titled Who’s Checking the Fact Checkers? (Estrin, D., O'Connor, G. & Fox, K. 2022). The second one is from Tablet titled Invasion of the Fact Checkers (Siegel, 2022). I selected these two articles at face value. I searched for articles, editorials or podcasts on fact checking. Then went with the two similar titles from different sources. I tried to not make too many assumptions when selecting the articles. I wanted to just select it off the name only. This was actually little more difficult than I anticipated. My first search yielded so many political titles that I had to revise my search words. I did find it interesting on how many reproductions of the NPR podcast. Most where NPR affiliate stations, but subtle changes to the title. With my two selections made I wanted to make some assumptions about the articles before reading them. First the NPR article. My initial assumption was that it would be somewhat middle of the road. Not really defending a side and trying to remain very a political. On the second article from Tablet the assumptions were fairly clear. I knew it would have a very distinct side or position that it was going to take. With the first word being invasion it was obvious to me that some form of takeover was happening. Similar in a war scenario when the opposing force invades a country to occupy it. This lead to the trying to assume what position they were taking. Was it going to be a specific political side or was it going to be a first amendment argument. Even with these basic assumptions I knew the podcast was going to be somewhat combative or very defensive to one point of view.
3 Main Claim and Point of View NPR Who's checking the fact checkers? The NPR podcast focused primarily of the Russian attacks in Ukraine. It was very detailed with specifics. The article outlined exactly how Russia was using fake fact checking on the app Telegram to mislead the people opinion. Some of the examples they shared showed the Russians were basically manipulating the information into propaganda. Several channels on the messaging app Telegram look like independent fact-checkers, but if you look closer, you see they're actually pro-Russian propaganda outlets spreading fake news about the invasion (Estrin, D., O'Connor, G. & Fox, K. 2022). The NPR podcast does seem well scripted and focused on a very specific topic. The main claim was that Russians are using deceptive fact checking to alter the opinion of the invasion of Ukraine. The are taking a specific side and supporting Ukraine, but the evidence they present clearly shows the Russian posts have been faked or altered. The podcast did not really state an opinion. It just presented the facts and the evidence. You could infer some opinions, but nothing was really obvious. The podcast actually never stated who is right or wrong. The only sensational part of the whole podcast was the title. Invasion of the Fact-Checkers The Tablet article starts off on a soft introduction, but quickly makes the point that fact checkers are organizations or groups that act only to support the ruling class or an agenda. The focal point is the assumption that there is no oversight to these organizations. The article does bring several references to support this claim. The article is also clearly written to a conservative audience. The writer mentions the democratic party several times and not in a comforting way. I think the key sentence from the article that shows the bias was America’s new public-private
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
4 “Ministry of Truth” mainly serves the interests of the tech platforms and Democratic Party operatives who underwrite and support the fact-checking enterprise (Siegel, 2022). When looking for a specific ideological perspective it was a little more difficult. The underlying tone was mistrust of the fact checking enterprise. This could be loosely tied to a moral based on the belief that fact checkers are providing misleading information. The other possible ideological perspective is the writers political alignment. The article is in my opinion very logical and does have several sources from a variety of well-known sources. Further in to the article the writer does a good job of highlight the impact bad fact checking has had to both main political parties. Conclusion Part of this critical writing assignment was to define what peer reviewed source is. According to Elsevier.com the peer review system exists to validate academic work, helps to improve the quality of published research, and increases networking possibilities within research communities (Elsevier.com 2022). There are many types of peer reviews and often the type of review depends on the article subject. When looking for article to complete this critical writing assignment I considered some of the peer review methods and the peer review process. I wanted to approach both articles with an open mind and apply the same review methods. I focused on 5 main points. 1. Does the article have credibility in the references. 2. Does the article led the reader to a conclusion. 3. Does the bias affect the credibility of the sources.
5 4. Does the article provide knowledge regardless of the group. 5. Does it create a desire to learn more. My five points my seem very basic, but I wanted to keep it simple and easily grounded. Overall, both articles did meet my 5 points. The more informative article Invasion of the Fact- Checkers had excellent sources, but I feel many readers would not finish it due to perceived bias towards the democratic party. It is only later in the article that he explains this bias with factual source citations. I today’s society I believe this is a critical problem. To many perceive every article written as a personal attack on their beliefs. This is usually not the case, but in the age of the internet it does happen. Efficient critical thinking will require us to not let personal bias get in the way of providing an objective assessment.
6 References Estrin, D., O'Connor, G. & Fox, K. (2022, April 19). Who's checking the fact checkers? NPR. https://www.npr.org/2022/04/19/1093620448/whos-checking-the-fact-checkers Siegel, J. (2022, March 21). Fact Checking the Fact Checkers - Tablet Magazine. Tabletmag. https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/invasion-fact-checkers Elsevier.com (2022, January 13). What is peer review? Elsevier. https://www.elsevier.com/reviewers/what-is-peer-review
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help