Video instructions and help with filling out and completing What Form 2220 Navigation

Instructions and Help about What Form 2220 Navigation

Hi I'm John Green welcome to crash course navigating digital information so the Internet is a place where you can meet friends for life from halfway around the world you can keep in touch with your loved ones you can learn new languages and pick up new skills it's also a place where your mother can tag you in an extremely detailed Facebook post about the night of your birth that all your friends can see and it's a place where you can accidentally like your ex's new boyfriend's Instagram selfie from three years ago god it would be hard to be a young person on the internet right now I really admire your fortitude and resilience these days a lot of us are asking whether the Internet is a net positive or a net negative in our lives but I tend to think that question might be what Buddhist Zen masters called a question wrongly put instead the better question might be how can I make the internet a more positive force in my life and the lives of others and part of the answer I think is that better information leads to better decision making which leads to a better world so for the sake of our collective souls let's improve our information sorting Music so as you may remember from our first episode we've teamed up with media wise with support from Google to bring you this series our friends at the Stanford history education group or Sheng have done a lot of research on how Internet users evaluate the information they find they've tested middle school high school and college students also history professors and professional fact-checkers who were by far the best at judging the reliability of information professional fact-checkers worked with news organizations to verify facts sometimes that means they look over articles before they're published to ensure the content is accurate and up to date they might call up a source for example to double check the spelling of their name once there was a profile of me in The New Yorker and the fact checker asked me questions for over an hour and in the end the piece contained no errors although it did have an illustration I found a tad unflattering to be fair the illustration also contained no errors I just don't think I liked my face anyway fact checkers also work for publications whose sole purpose is to verify claims made by public figures or on the Internet and explain why they are or are not true Snopes and PolitiFact are some of the more well-known fact-checking sites so in the Stanford study college students history professors and fact checkers were all asked to look at two websites one website belonged to the American Academy of Pediatrics or the AAP the main professional organization of pediatricians the other site belonged to the American College of pediatricians or the ACP now of course they sound very similar but the ACP is actually an organization that broke away from the AAP because the AAP supports adoption by LGBTQ couples the AAP is a large well-respected professional organization my kids pediatrician is a member the ACP on the other hand is a much smaller more ideologically motivated interest group but looking at the two sites many of the professors and students thought the ACP site was more credible why because they focused on the site itself they spent time examining and reading the website noticing that there were footnotes and checking out its design elements one student said of the ACPs website I can automatically see this source and trusted just because how official it looks even the font and the way the logo looks makes me think this is a mind hive that compiled this the ACPs website may have looked official but when compared to the a AP's website its information was less reliable aap is the trustworthy group so the professors and students focused on the websites themselves and how they presented information to decide which was more credible that meant they didn't do a great job of evaluating the source itself the fact checkers on the other hand did much better because they consistently asked themselves three questions while evaluating the sites one who is behind this information - what is the evidence for their claims and three what do other sources say about the organization and its claims these questions are a really useful framework when you want to interpret the accuracy of information you've encountered let's begin with who's behind the information first we want to know who exactly is sharing it with you a friend on Facebook a stranger a news organization is it a promoted post that a company paid to insert into your feed an anonymous social media account and then we should ask ourselves why they are sharing it each of those shares mentioned could have very different reasons for presenting information in a particular way I am for instance incentivized by my career to say that I think teenagers should read contemporary fiction specifically contemporary fiction written by me and I am more likely to share stories of people who benefited from reading contemporary fiction and even your personal friends have motivations for sharing what they do online they may want to signal what kind of person they are or wish to be seen as or they may want to win over others to their world view or they may be trying to get someone's attention with the sub tweet a journalist might be sharing information because they think it's important for their readers to know but of course that decision is based on their own personal experiences an advocate for a particular cause might be sharing information to persuade others to join that cause once you've established who is sharing the information with you and thought about why they might be doing so you can get to the heart