Critical Thinking FINAL

Fake News

deliberately false or misleading news stories that masquerade as truthful reporting

Taxonomy of Misinformation

1) Lies

2) Propaganda
3) Opinions

4) Bias

5) Hoaxes

6) Satire

Propaganda

biased or misleading information created to support a political cause. while it’s different from fake news, fake news can be used as a part of it. it’s commonly used in politics and public relations.

Lies

false statements made on purpose to trick people. fake news is a kind of lie, but if something is false because of a mistake or misunderstanding, it’s not a lie or fake news

Bias

when reporting favors one side, leaving out facts or misrepresenting others. it’s not always fake news—unless it’s meant to deceive—but it’s still dishonest and poor journalism

Opinions

personal views or beliefs in writing. they aren’t fake news unless they’re used to deceive purposely. even sloppy or unclear reporting isn’t fake news unless it’s done to mislead.

Satire

uses humor, exaggeration, or sarcasm to criticize people’s flaws or mistakes. while it’s fake, it’s not fake news. satire is meant to be funny or outrageous, but can be confused with real news, even though it’s usually marked as satirical (ex: The Onion, Clickhole, The Daily Mire) it’s different from intentional misinformation

Hoaxes

a lie made to seem true, often for personal gain or to cause a reaction. while many hoaxes in the media are fake news, others are scams (financial, health), computer virus hoaxes, urban legends, or email hoaxes

Reasonable Skepticism

an attitude that involves giving up the habit of automatically accepting claims in the media, rejecting the questionable assumption that most of what’s said online is true, and refusing to believe a claim unless there are legitimate reasons for doing so

Legitimate Reasons

those that increase the likelihood of a claim being true.

such reasons come from reliable evidence, trustworthy sources, and critical reasoning

Illegitimate Reasons

those that are irrelevant to the truth of a claim.

ex:

-this source contradicts my beliefs. (if I disagree with it, it must be fake news)

-this source reinforces what I’d like to believe. (so i will believe it without question)

-I reject any claim that comes from sources I don’t like. (because nothing they say can be right.)

-I feel strongly that the claims made by this source are true; therefore, they are true. (because my feelings alone can certify claims)

-i let my intuition or gut tell me whether to trust a source. (it saves time and energy.)

Read Laterally

checking multiple sources to verify information and get a fuller picture. this method helps identify fake news by cross-checking facts, spotting biases, and gathering more context to expose misleading or false claims

Read Critically

analyzing and questioning the information you encounter. it helps identify fake news by evaluating the credibility of sources, questioning the content, understanding the context, and fact-checking with multiple sources

Check Your Own Biases

being aware of your personal prejudices and minimizing their impact. this can be done by self-reflection, seeking diverse viewpoints, questioning assumptions, and educating yourself

2 Obstacles with Fake Images

1) people tend to believe photos/videos too easily, thinking that what they see is the whole, undistorted truth

2) experts point out that people are not good at recognizing when images have been changed/doctored

4 Ways To Identify Fake Images/Videos

1) Determine the Source: check if the source is credible. be cautious with unknown or dubious sources

2) Check for Previous Uses: use tools like reverse image search to see if the content has been repurposed

3) Be Wary of the Incredible: if it seems too sensational or shocking, be skeptical

4) Look for Incongruities: check for inconsistencies, like lighting or shadows, which could suggest editing

Advertising

the practice of calling the public’s attention to something to induce them to buy products or services or otherwise change their opinions or behavior

Internet Advertising

1) Paid Search Ads

2) Social Media Ads

3) Display Ads

4) Native Advertising

Paid Search Ads

appear at the top of search results on sites like Google, Bing, and Yahoo. They’re labeled “AD” or “Sponsored.” These ads are placed there because someone paid for them—not because they’re more accurate or reliable

Social Media Ads

appear on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and others. Advertisers pay to target specific audiences based on personal traits and behaviors. these ads—labeled “Sponsored” or “Promoted”—can be banners, videos, or clickable posts

Display Ads

they’re like online billboards. they show up as images, banners, popups, sidebars, or videos on websites related to the product or service. they may or may not be targeted to specific types of users

Native Advertising

paid advertising designed to imitate the tone, style, and look of a publication’s editorial or journalistic content. it persuades through stories or info, not obvious sales pitches. Though labeled “Sponsored” or “Promoted,” people often can’t tell it apart from real news or editorial content

Old School Advertising Tricks

1) Identification

2) Slogans

3) Misleading Comparisons

4) Weasel Words

Identification

links the product with a certain lifestyle or person to make you feel it fits your identity

ex: stylish people driving luxury cars

Slogans

catchy phrases that make a product memorable and highlight its benefits

ex: Nike’s “Just Do It”

Misleading Comparisons

makes the product look better by comparing it unfairly

ex: “50% less sugar” than something extremely sugary

Weasel Words

uses vague terms like “helps” or “up to” to sound impressive without promising results

ex: “helps fight cavities”

Why is Political Advetising a challenge to critical thinking?

politcal ads can be just as biased and misleading as propaganda. It’s often hard to tell the difference. Now that they’re digital and micro-targeted on social media, they’ve become more sneaky and powerful than ever.

includes:

-misrepresentation

-splicing

-docotring

Misrepresentation

using an image or video out of context to give a false impression

Splicing

editing and rearranging clips to change the meaning and create a false story

Doctoring

digitally changing content—like adding, removing, or editing parts—to mislead

ex: photoshopping people in or out

Inference To The Best Explanation

a form of inductive reasoning in which we reason from premises about a state of affairs to an explanation for that state of affairs

Phenomenon Q.

E provides the best explanation for Q.

Therefore, it’s probable that E is true.

Internal Consistency

the explanation makes sense within itself—no contradictions or gaps in logic

External Consistency

the explanation matches what we already know—agrees with facts, data, or science

5 Criterias of Adequacy

the standards used to judge the worth of explanatory theories.

includes:

-testability

-fruitfulness

-scope

-simplicity

-conservatism

Testablility

an explanation can be checked through observation or experiments. if it can be confirmed or proven wrong, it’s testable

Fruitfulness

is about how useful an explanation is for making new discoveries, predictions, or insights. a fruitful theory helps us learn more

Scope

refers to how much an explanation can cover or account for. a theory with broad _____ explains more things and is usually stronger

Simplicity

favors explanations that are easy to understand and don’t include unnecessary details. simple theories are often more believable

Ad Hoc Hypothesis

a hypothesis, or theory, that can’t be verified independently of the phenomenon it’s supposed to explain. it always make a theory less simple—and therefore less credible

Conservatism

checks if the explanation fits with what we already know. a conservative theory agrees with established facts and accepted ideas

TEST Formula

A four-step procedure for evaluating the worth of a theory:
Step 1: state the Theory and check for consistency

Step 2: assess the Evidence for the theory

Step 3: Scrutinize alternative theories

Step 4: Test the theories with the criteria of adequacy

Negative Partisanship

when beliefs are formed primarily because of hate for others

Appeals to Personal Certainty

the attempt to prove a claim by appealing to the fact that you’re certain of it. using someone’s confidence as proof their claim is true, but confidence doesn’t equal accuracy—evidence matters.

ex: “No doubt about it, Joe Biden is irredeemably corrupt!” or “Of course Republicans are racist!”

Straw Man, “Nutpicking”

taking an extreme member of an opposition group and treating them as representative of the group as a whole.

ex: “Smith—a lifelong Democrat— says the best government is a communist government. The Democrats have gone absolutely crazy!” or “Look at the radical ravings of Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Green. The Republicans are all a bunch of extremists.”

Straw Man, Radicalizing The Opposition

transforming a modest, qualified proposition from an opposing group into an unqualified radical proposition so it can be more easily attacked or refuted.
ex:

You: “I think this policy might lead to mistakes or problems in some circumstances, but we should nevertheless implement it.”

Your Opponent: “So you’re saying problems will always happen with this policy. Why would you institute something so ridiculous?”

Whataboutism

the opposing of an accusation by arguing that an opponent is guilty of an equally bad or worse offense.

ex: Donald Trump defending himself against impeachment charges by asking, “What about all of the Clinton ties to Russia, including Podesta Company, Uranium deal, Russian Reset, big dollar speeches…?”

Motivism

dismissing an argument not because the argument is bad, but because you think the arguer’s motives are bad.

ex: “People mistakenly believe COVID vaccinations work because they’re slaves to Big Pharma,” or “Scientists warn us about global warming out of greed.”

bad thinking habits

-rejecting all facts that contradict your beliefs

-accepting big claims without asking for evidence

-assuming news you don’t like is fake

-refusing to consider opposing views

Why is relying on hyperpartisan sources a problem?

because they distort reality, use unreliable info, spread propaganda, and lack trustworthy evidence. if your arguments depends only on these sources, it’s weak

where to find truth of media sources

websites like Media Bias/Fact Check, AllSides, and Snopes help you check source bias and verify claims.

motivated reasoning

reasoning to defend what you already believe, not to find the truth

When is anger in political debate reasonable?

anger is okay if it’s about real moral issues. but if it replaces rational discussion or turns into insults, it’s hyperpartisan

What are illegitimate reasons for believing a poltical claim?

-trusting a source only because your group does

-believing something just because the other side doesn’t

-rejecting anything from sources you dislike

-accepting whatever your political leader says without question

Hasty Generalization

when someone makes a sweeping statement without considering all of the facts, conclusions are drawn from a small sample size

ex: “my two friends got food poisoning from that new restaurant, so all their food must be bad.”

Slippery Slope

a conclusion based on the idea that one small step will lead to a chain of events resulting in a significant (usually negative) outcome

ex: “If we allow students to use calculators in exams, next they’ll stop learning math altogether, and soon no one will know how to do basic math.”

Straw Man

when someone distorts an opponent’s claim to make it easier to refute

ex:

person A: “We should reduce our use of plastic to help the environment.”

person B: “Oh, so you think we should ban all plastics and shut down industries? That’s unrealistic!”

Ad Hominem

an attack on a person’s character or personal attributes to discredit their argument.

ex:

person A: “We should invest more in renewable energy to combat climate change.”

person B: “Why should we listen to you? You’re not even a scientist.”

False Dichotomy

when an argument presents only two options while ignoring others; also called the either/or fallacy

ex: “you either support my plan, or you don’t care about the environment at all.”

Appeal to Emotion

using emotional language to persuade rather than logical reasoning

ex: “if you don’t donate to this charity, thousands of innocent animals will suffer and die!”

Equivocation

using ambiguous or double meanings in language to mislead; also called doublespeak

ex: “the sign said ‘Fine for Parking Here,’ so I thought it was okay to park.”

Bandwagon Appeal

persuading by suggesting that everyone else is doing it

ex: “everyone is switching to this new phone brand—you should too!”

False Analogy

comparing two unlike things based on a trivial similarity.

ex: “cars and smartphones are both tools we use every day, so if cars need a driver’s license, smartphones should require one too.”

Circular Reasoning

when the conclusion is simply a restatement of the premise, A is true because B is true, and B is true because A is true.

ex: “I’m trustworthy because I always tell the truth.”

Conspiracy Theory

a belief that a group of people have a secret plot and are responsible for something happening

Why are conspiracy theories so appealing?

they provide answers that align with our preconceived notions and biases, and appeal to our emotional, intutuve “System 1” thinking

Who benefits from spreading conspiracy theories, and how?

politicians and social media companies benefit—politicians spread misinformation for influence, and social platforms profit from high-engagement conspiracy content

What is cognitive reflection?

thinking carefully before accepting something as true—overriding emotional or gut reactions (System 2 thinking over System 1)

How to practice cognitive reflection?

by fact-checking, questioning information, avoiding emotional reactions, and verifying sources before forming beliefs

Questions to ask about resisting conspiracy theories

-where is this information coming form?

-is the source credible?

-does it rely on emotions or facts?

what do fact-checkers say?

Moral Statement

a statement asserting that an action is right or wrong (moral or immoral) or that something (such as a person or motive) is good or bad

ex:

-Serena should keep her promise to you.

-It’s wrong to treat James so harshly.

-abortion is immoral.

-We ought to protect Liu from the angry mob.

-My father is a good man.

Nonmoral Statements

do NOT assert that something is right or wrong, good or bad—they simply describe a state of affairs without giving it a value one way or the other.

ex:

-Serena did not keep her promise to you.

-James was treated harshly.

-Some people think abortion is immoral.

-Liu was protected from the angry mob.

-My father tried to be a good man.

Worldview

a philosophy of life, a set of beliefs and theories that helps us make sense of a wide range of issues in life

Utilitarianism

what makes an action right is that it maximizes overall happiness, considering everyone.

if happiness is maximized by a particular action, then the action is morally right, regardless of any other considerations.

Kantian Ethics

the moral rules (or duties) are expressed as categorical imperatives—as commands that apply without exception (categorically, or absolutely) and without regard to a person’s preference or goals.