Ok, this is not going to be a well formulated question, because the concerns behind it are nebulous in my own head.
Some assumptions I have, that clearly inform the question that follows: I believe commercial, state, and others have sophisticated methods of influencing what I see on social media and thus, in part, what I think. I also believe that someone more willing to believe in the types of conspiratorial beliefs I’ve just expressed are more likely to be manipulated by information they’re exposed to. And, yes, I fully appreciate the irony of those beliefs.
My child is adult enough that belief patterns I encourage are very unlikely to become deep patterns. That is, I’d have to work to indoctinate my son, and he’d actively resist if my indoctrination was outside of societal norms.
He didn’t grow up exposed to the social media I suspect children do now.
How does a parent inoculate a child to the influence of social media without also creating a mindset willing to believe in a nebulous “them” that controls things—a mindset, I believe, that makes a person more likely to be controlled?
My son was taught in school (UK) how to research on the web. You can never be sure how much they take in but he asked us one day why we were still watching the main stream news broadcasters - BBC, Sky, ITN. In a space of a couple of minutes he produced the original from the web for most of their stories, alternative views and pros and cons for most of the views. I learnt a lot that day and can honestly say I think his school did an excellent job. He does his own research and forms his own opinion - sometimes I don’t agree but that’s OK - the key is he can articulate his reasoning and provide evidence to support his view. I’m not sure as a parent if I’d have been as good a teacher or as impartial. I’m happy it’s part of the syllabus in UK - I’m really not sure I’d be so happy if we lived in Florida for the school to teach it. Too much state intervention.
For some reason this feels really strange to hear from the uk. I was under the impression things where moving more authoritarian with face detection cameras, encryption forbidden and id for pornsites. Usually those kind of government hate informed citizens and push propaganda. But maybe its just me who has been propagandized about the uk ¯_(ツ)_/¯
The government is also made up of different groups. Whilst one hand (security) may get more authoritarian, another hand (education) may encourage more liberal(?*) concepts, like knowing your source.
*I couldn’t think of the right word for this.
Encourage critical thinking skills and empathy. 👍
Well, there’s not just one Them.
The Them who wrote your American history textbook and glossed over the centrality of slavery to the Confederate cause, aren’t the same Them who write TV sitcoms that propagate stereotypes of bumbling clueless men entitled to dump all the emotional labor on their hyper-competent women partners.
The Them who fund intrusive social media, aren’t the same Them who dial down the yellow-light time on your traffic lights to catch more people with red-light cameras.
And the closer you look, the less it looks like a Them at all.
The individual TV writers were really trying to be good TV writers, in the social & economic context of TV studios.
The history textbook people were mostly actual professors. They want you to have a good history textbook. But the Texas Board of Education is giving them a hard time.
Heck, the social-media programmers mostly just wanna launch cool stuff.
The yellow-light people, though? They have no goddamn excuse.
This is an important point - it’s the difference between emphasizing critical thinking skills vs falling into conspiracy theories, or being privacy-conscious vs being paranoid.
I think starting critical thinking with empathy is incredibly important. E.g. “What’s motivating this person to write this?” Are they trying to get clicks, are they trying to move the needle on an issue, are they meeting their word count quota for the day? Are they just lonely or isolated or scared and lashing out because they can’t find affirmation? Or even, are they paid by a foreign state to post controversial things and stir up dissent in another country because it helps their country economically?
There are many possible motivations, but it’s not going to be a big global conspiracy dedicated to manipulating you personally. Understanding a person’s starting point and motivation helps you critically think through their points and decide what you agree or disagree with.
It’s so hard to see from your perspective sometimes. Feels like everything’s a conspiracy haha. But you are 100% correct.
The “them” we feel is the sum of all human outcomes, personified as a discrete organism. Maybe all of humanity is one big mega-organism and thats the “them”.
Yeah, but in the end all those people get their orders from higher up, and in the end they execute the vision of the people in charge. All of this only to get their pay to be able to afford to live with a roof over their head and food on the table.
I feel the “order” is more in line with “make me a sitcome that targets young man and will make me a lot of money” rather than “propagate misogyny and stereotypes”. Both lead to Big Bang Theory though.
Instead of focusing on specifics (online, “they”) focus on the basics.
Where does any piece of information come from? What are the underlying assumptions in it? How is it framed? How is it circulated? What effect does it have? Etc. If people automatically think critically, they are way less susceptible.
This comment reminds me of CrashCourse Navigating Digital Information which taught me fact checking and how to look up info on the internet. Playlist Here
Teach him early and remind him often about how to vet his sources. Things like making sure you know who’s funding what you’re reading, what the political reputation of the sites you’re reading on are, and so forth.
Honestly, this is probably the single most important internet skill that exists, second only to (maybe) information security / data privacy, and I didn’t get my first serious classroom lesson on this until I was in my Master’s degree program. This is a skill people need from goddamn grade school these days.
Yes, it can be tedious, yes it can be exhausting, but if you want to understand who is, or could be, pulling your strings, you have to understand how to vet your sources. Never learning to do this is the path to Fox News viewership.
I would agree with the other comments here and say the best thing to do would be to vet sources. Things like ‘looking through a commenter’s history’ or ‘reading the About Us section of a news site’ and ‘looking at more than just the top 3 results from Google for sources’.
There’s no magic bullet. Manipulation exists, and manipulation based on claims of manipulation exists.
I recommend you explain but don’t force your view of the world onto kids, and tech kids how to think well for themselves instead. So, just steer them towards things like history, social sciences and to a degree hard sciences and let them make sense of the world for themselves.
I found that Minecraft is actually a pretty good teacher. There are servers (like hypixel.net) out there where kids can play different games or buy plots of lands with coins to run shops and stuff.
My kid has seen people advertising bullshit, scams, manipulation, but also genuinely good and nice people but also betrayal from people he thought to be good.
The manipulation isn’t as good as in the real world. But it’s good enough for discussions on how it’s done in the real world.
Interesting concept to have Minecraft as a kind of safe space to learn about idiots and necessary precautions on the internet. My kids are 3 and 4, so the age of Minecraft is right around the corner and I’m looking forward to it :)
You cannot control what someone does or doesn’t believe but you can teach ways to deal with an abundance of information and political agendas.
To teach a person to correctly look behind the curtain without falling into conspiracy is the greatest gift. My parents failed to do so because they hated discussing topics in a neutral way. They also knew nothing about philosophy or propaganda.
Same way parents can teach stoic wisdom without raising an emotionless kid. Same way we can teach morals and responsibilities without the need of any religion.
I would summarize that parents just should be parents. Kids mirror parents and being calm and focused is so important. My parents were and are always angry and this got imprinted in my subconsciousness, which sucks. (Bully target) Thankful most people grow up fast school age.
For example last weekend I talked to my cousin about some good news sites, that are as unbiased as possible. (In Germany we thankfully have independent press). I think it’s important to grow up not drifting in desperation of “all news fake. Voting doesn’t matter”, it makes one feel helpless and thats the last thing a kid should have to endure.
Understanding how to identify wrong information, as the fake news they are, with examples and exposition is so important.
In my mind there is no them, but individuals, trying to achieve their own goals. Everyone has some incentive to misinterpret and twist truth. It might be just so it fits with their own biases and world view little better. The only reasonable way to use information online is to follow evidence based information and look for trusthworthy official sources.
I have a few thoughts on that one. First, I‘d try and teach that changing one‘s opinion based on new information is good and admirable and that not knowing something or not having an opinion on something one doesn‘t understand is fine.
Specifically for media, something like this paper is excellent though obviously not child friendly, I think even way too little adults are aware of this sort of framing that media and companies regularly do:
So trying to show/explain, how does framing something differently change the perceptions of people?
Another important thing in my mind is teaching something like Plato‘s allegory of the cave, so how we are presented the world is how we see the world and nobody knows everything about it because we only see a small part of it. That ties back in with my point about it being good to question one‘s beliefs from time to time.
If you already know you have the correct worldview, then just present the data to him that would lead someone to believe in your worldview. You can’t be immune to ideology without having one of your own. Someone who drifts through life believing nothing will believe anything.
Part of what prompted my question is that I doubt I have the correct worldview because I believe I’m influenced.
Who’s to say whose world view is “correct”. I’d say it’s more important to do as other commenters have said, encourage critical thinking and research.
The child is their own person, not an extension of the parent to be influenced.
It’s good you don’t want to be controlled but your child could be, anyway who gives a fuck you will die anyway… i have no children but if they want to be controlled i don’t give a flying fuck anyway they are free to be manipulated just as you don’t.
