What Does Critical Media Literacy Look Like for Democratic Citizens in a Post-Truth Era?

• In Event: 15.010 - Skeptical and Affective Literacies: Redefining Critical Media Pedagogies in a "Post-Truth" Era

Abstract

Political and civic actions today occur as often through social media networks as they do on the streets or in the voting booth. The impact of “sorting” in society has exacerbated this issue (Bishop, 2008). People today are more likely to live and encounter people with similar economic, racial/ethnic, and political backgrounds. They are less likely to encounter cross-cutting political talk or divergent views (Hess & McAvoy, 2015; Mutz, 2005) as a result of the “filter bubble” created by algorithms and self-curation of information (Iyengar & Hahn, 2009; Pariser, 2011). These factors contribute to the effectiveness of propaganda, disinformation campaigns, the rise of “fake news,” and a growing distrust in news institutions (Rich & Kavanaugh, 2018).

Social studies classes are charged to develop informed citizens. However, there is a massive disconnect between how schools teach civics and what students need to understand about the dynamic nature of contemporary politics and the role of media to be prepared as active agents of change (Levine & Kawashima-Ginsberg, 2017; McAvoy & Hess, 2013; Stoddard, 2014). Numerous programs are attempting to address the current “fake news” crisis in news literacy (e.g., McGrew, Ortega, Breakstone, & Wineburg, 2017) with updated versions of heuristics or strategies for evaluating online information. They do not, however, help students develop public and counterpublic spaces for media education as participatory democratic spaces.

These pedagogical models also do not generally meet the criteria of critical media literacy (CML), which includes both analytical skills/praxis as well as reflections on issues of power, authority, and intent in media (e.g., Funk, Kellner & Share, 2015; Hoechsmann & Poyntz, 2012; Kellner & Share, 2007). It has also been postulated that engaging students in media production and reflecting on production, will help them develop CML (e.g., Hoechsmann & Poyntz, 2012; Kellner & Share, 2007). However, in two studies I have conducted with high school students and with 18-22 year olds, participants have easily analyzed media sources and recognized the intent and issues of power – hallmarks of CML - yet are not able to reflect on how these media engagements have impacted their own views on issues represented (author, 2016, 2017, 2018). In fact, they view themselves as being impervious to media messages.

In this essay I explore what CML could be for the post-truth era. In particular, I focus on a critique of current curricula and expand on what it means to have critical consciousness in a participatory and media-driven political context. In this way CML is re-envisioned as praxis within participatory democratic spaces – helping students reconsider what it means to have critical reflection of our own role in the media landscape and how our engagements with media impact our own views and understandings of the nature of knowledge – a form of critical epistemic metacognition (Hofer & Sinatra, 2010; Mason, Boldrin, & Ariasi, 2010). The goal is to shift from cognitive to social and critical models for media education - to help students reflect on how their own emotions, actions, and understandings shape and are shaped by their engagements with others through media.

Author

• Jeremy D. Stoddard, University of Wisconsin - Madison