'It is possible to misunderstand people only by facts', and fact checking is not enough. What is the really necessary 'correct understanding' mechanism?

Twitter and Facebook carry out fact checking on information existing on SNS, but various organizations have pointed out that fact checking is insufficient. Fact checking is necessary to prevent misunderstandings of information recipients, but why the current system does not reduce such misunderstandings and continues to promote people's prejudices, the non-profit media organization The, which promotes a culture of dialogue. The Consilience Project discusses it.

How to Mislead with Facts

Fact checking is an act of verifying the accuracy and validity of information, and has achieved a certain effect as a countermeasure against disinformation, but in recent years, 'fact checking is not enough for correct understanding.' It has been pointed out that. This is because 'misrecognition' can occur without false information.

In order for a person to understand things correctly, comprehensive information on things from various aspects is necessary, but taking this in the wrong direction, separating the facts from the context and carefully selecting and presenting only those that 'appeal to emotions' By doing so, it is possible to mislead people by using only facts and truths. In this way, the media and advertisements misunderstand people by using only 'facts', and based on that misunderstanding, people are extremely polarized. For this reason, fact checks that verify 'whether or not they are true' are believed to fail to achieve the goal of 'giving people a comprehensive understanding.'

In recent years, with the development of technology, it has become possible to distribute information to pinpoint targets by analyzing personal information and grasping user preferences and behavior patterns. This technique, called micro-targeting , allows users to remain unquestioned and strengthen their beliefs and ideologies.

Instagram locks people in 'the reality they think'-GIGAZINE

Given the above situation, The Consilience Project argues that a more educational approach is needed. He argued that it is necessary to not only verify the facts, but also to present the context of the information and to compare and verify it including related facts. The contents of The Consilience Project as 'four things necessary to understand the facts' are as follows.

1: The work of identifying the origin of information and confirming and verifying whether it is a reliable source and whether it is supported by multiple independent organizations.
2: Regarding the information recognized as facts, consider whether or not there is a 'related important context', what points are limited, and what the meaning is when extracted from the context.
3: Obtain information on 'additional facts' necessary to understand the meaning of facts.
Only after 4: 1-3, think about the 'meaning of facts'. Take different perspectives on the facts and consider why such a situation occurs when the facts have emotional and personal implications for a particular person or group.

The Consilience Project believes that by paying attention to all four of the above, you can avoid the 'facts are misleading' situation. The Consilience Project emphasized the importance of discussing information as well as the fact-checking mechanism in order to realize these four methods.

in Note, Posted by logq_fa