3 ms·

> This essentially means the web is too difficult for some users and they need something else I think you are on the right track, but not going all the way. Th

by bostik 7y ago

> This essentially means the web is too difficult for some users and they need something else I think you are on the right track, but not going all the way. The bigger issue here is that media literacy is incredibly hard. You need a wide body of knowledge, essentially an educated[ß] mind, and an almost unhealthy skepticism against absolutely everything you read, see or hear. As a short cut, a good first approximation is to be a cynic. Assume everyone is pushing their own agenda, and that even at best you can only see half of it. (If you are asking yourself what agenda I am pushing with this post, well done. You're off to a good start.) ß: The ability to question information, conduct research, cross-check the results of research, and have the mental agility to identify your own biases - these are not natural tendencies, but learned traits. We can lump them all under the "educated" label, even if that's not the optimal term.

skybrian 7y ago
Yes, it is hard. But I think it's not just education, but epistemic humility. We have no direct knowledge of what's going on in other parts of the world. The past is often not recorded accurately, the future often unpredictable. So our default assumption should often be that we don't know what's going on. Highly educated people in the grip of an ideology can dream up conclusions far beyond the limited and unreliable evidence we get from media consumption. They are often rewarded for this. And one of these ideologies is the myth of rugged individualism (or competent adulthood), the idea that each person can and should figure out what's going on by themselves. It's obviously not true of children and the elderly, but most of us outsource a lot of our thinking. Living in modern civilization inherently means having a lot of trust and dependency on others. The ideals of media literacy are simply unrealistic for most people. It's not clear what the alternative is, though.

by bostik 7y ago

skybrian 7y ago

Yes, it is hard. But I think it's not just education, but epistemic humility. We have no direct knowledge of what's going on in other parts of the world. The past is often not recorded accurately, the future often unpredictable. So our default assumption should often be that we don't know what's going on. Highly educated people in the grip of an ideology can dream up conclusions far beyond the limited and unreliable evidence we get from media consumption. They are often rewarded for this. And one of these ideologies is the myth of rugged individualism (or competent adulthood), the idea that each person can and should figure out what's going on by themselves. It's obviously not true of children and the elderly, but most of us outsource a lot of our thinking. Living in modern civilization inherently means having a lot of trust and dependency on others. The ideals of media literacy are simply unrealistic for most people. It's not clear what the alternative is, though.