In a classroom setting, educators teach and support critical thinking and metacognition to a stable audience. Assignments can be structured to require or at least encourage analysis and awareness of bias or intent by creators of the works being studied. It’s a safe bet that most teachers hope their students will develop those skills as habits and carry them into the rest of their lives. Whether students carry those skills forward or not, most people living outside the academic sphere have not had significant training or incentive to examine their media exposure or its effects. 

In the larger world, much is made of the importance of people having digital literacy and thinking critically, but a bigger question remains: how can we influence people to learn and apply these skills in a meaningful way rather than just to support their current beliefs? When danah boyd asks “Did Media Literacy Backfire?,” she writes about the dangers inherent in readers drawing conclusions about the trustworthiness of their sources based on intuition and their own experience rather than deeper analysis. She recognizes the tendency of people encouraged to be critical of their information sources to trust or doubt based in large part on how closely media aligns with the readers’ worldview. Are there practices or structures that can be deployed to divert people towards thinking outside their usual filter bubbles? And will media consumers be open to them?

Wendy Rose Gould invites readers to analyze their social media bubble and gives practical, concrete ideas to break out of them. She acknowledges that people continue to live in and reinforce their bubbles because it is uncomfortable to experience cognitive dissonance, and easy to avoid it, especially in an era of algorithm-curated news feeds. The question that arises then, is how can we encourage society around us to do the work to expand their bubbles and be interested in other points of view? As educators, do we have a responsibility outside the classroom to foster growth? Trevor Hoag’s article “The Pretense of Neutrality” resonates as applicable within the higher education system, but even more for those that feel called to advance the aims of critical pedagogy outside a traditional pedagogical structure. In an era of prominent mis- and disinformation, it feels almost negligent to refrain from the attempt to nudge the conversation towards deeper thinking about media, its creators, and its aims.   

I work in libraries rather than schools. Libraries are educational institutions, far more self-directed than the average classroom. Constituents directly control their learning by choosing their own materials and programs, and may decide either not to use our services at all, or to work for change in our policies and holdings through elections or appointments to governing boards if we seem to privilege a philosophy contrary to their worldview. We support life-long learning and work towards social justice, while navigating the constraints of each community’s dominant culture. A similar tension exists on social media. I cultivate a variety of viewpoints on my feed to expand my own bubble, and hopefully that of my contacts through my own contributions. The question that unifies all of these interactions is how can I/we combat misinformation and present counternarratives in a way that may have constructive effects on our network? As described by Elizabeth Kolbert in the New Yorker (print version 2/27/2017,) confirmation bias is a well-known hazard to simply sharing facts that contradict a person’s deeply held belief, so better methods need to be employed for goals beyond starting a disagreement or inspiring a cull of contacts lists. The underlying mission may be to hold attention long enough for an audience to take an extra moment to interact with new information, or to consider a new angle to a subject about which they already have firm opinions. As I look forward to future library programs and publicity, and as I consider my footprint on social media, I intend to incorporate some of the following concepts.    

Empathy

In sources as disparate as Forbes magazine and a Community Toolkit for Addressing Health Misinformation from the Office of the US Surgeon General, authors emphasize the need for empathy and understanding other viewpoints. Neither makes the case that we need to embrace alternative interpretations or knowledge we understand to be demonstrably false, merely that it is essential to approach from a position of humility and seeking to know how someone has arrived at their conclusions. In many cases, it depends on group identities and status. Relationships and identity are integral to a person’s trust in information sources and willingness to process new information. In order to better understand a person’s worldview and areas of contention, it can be helpful to consider their day-to-day concerns and how those affect their experience with contentious issues. It is important to address misinformation or perceived wrongs privately, rather than in a public forum like a comments section. Nobody responds well to public shaming, and defensiveness will prevent someone from considering your input, much less adjusting their views.  

One strategy to increase empathy in our lives includes consciously curating our own varied social media and news feed. This may look like maintaining contacts or following newsfeeds that disagree with us on important issues. We can observe the sources they cite to see which media channels are shaping their views and providing them with the information they trust. If we find the validity of these sources suspect, we should be able to identify why we doubt their credibility and seek other sources with similar bias and better fact-finding. 

In the library world, empathy-building might look like some of the “Human Library” or facilitated conversation programs like the “Community Conversations” program in Estes Park, CO. These programs create an intentional environment for people to engage with each other and better recognize their shared humanity while recognizing that mutual respect does not require agreement on every topic. 

When we investigate our own beliefs and find we have made mistakes or misunderstandings, it is vital for us to accept responsibility and be open about our own fallibility. We should be willing to share our thought process or discoveries and how our views have matured. It is easier to connect with others when we acknowledge our own failings and can share that vulnerability. Being supportive and respectful when others change their minds or behavior due to increased knowledge or understanding is another essential aspect of fostering empathy in the world around us. 

Not Perpetuating the Problem

Kris Shaffer writes about “truthy lies and surreal truths” and how to recognize deceptive practices and prevent oneself from inadvertently propagating misinformation. He describes common methods used by malicious actors to link blatant untruths to factual information or to present falsehoods in a manner that looks more credible. He also discusses some ways in which truthful information can be presented to seem clearly inaccurate. A driving force throughout his article is doing the research to be certain of what and how much we know before creating or spreading information. It is vital to check varied sources for confirmation before sharing news stories, memes, videos, or pictures. Later findings of inaccuracies or embellishment lessens our credibility moving forward. He also stresses the importance of gathering and sharing reliable resources for finding and fact-checking news items. By creating  a list of trustworthy sources, we promote our own accuracy and better understanding of contentious topics. If we share those sources and information about why we find them to be useful, our relationships within a network may offer a boost to those sources and their broader acceptance. Consistent repetition and sharing of both informational resources and true versions of misinformation is also important, as one of the ways conspiracy theories and other disinformation spreads is through frequent sharing. Even when people are arguing against it, merely sharing the phrases, even in a denial, helps embed it more firmly in readers’ minds. Sharing the counterinformation without reference to the initial statement helps create another narrative for receptive and undecided consumers. Shaffer’s suggestions require effort and dedication, but he makes an excellent point that we have to be willing to put in the work to help counteract the far easier, algorithm-guided, social media feed methods that so many people around us rely on for their news and to guide their decisions.

Within a library setting, it is important to recognize our role as a community-supported information source. It is particularly vital to maintain a neutral tone and provide information the citizenry recognizes as valid. Libraries have been traditionally seen as trustworthy and valuable sources of information and services. We must maintain and grow that trust as various groups and individuals look to shift libraries’ priorities, programming, services and collections through the makeup of their governing boards. It is essential to continue our commitment to social justice and accurate information while protecting our ability to express those professional values in a manner that encourages mutual respect. When we maintain our reputation for trustworthiness, materials we share can benefit from our own credibility. Cultural shifts will be slow in some communities, and we have to be willing to commit to a long trajectory rather than looking for instant and wholesale shifts in worldview. 

Levity

Laughter builds trust, lowers stress, and increases memory retention. These are just a few of the tidbits that Jennifer Aaker and Naomi Bagdonas include in their book, Humor, Seriously: Why Humor is a Secret Weapon in Business and Life. The rest of the book is an enjoyable exploration of how to find levity in even the serious subjects as we navigate life. Humor is not appropriate in all discussions, but when there is room to lighten the mood or set the tone with a touch of the unexpected, a shared wry observation, or a self-deprecating statement, it creates a more fertile environment for increased flexibility, receptiveness and engagement. Even serious topics like seat belt use have benefited from a lighthearted approach in advertising and public awareness. According to Aaker and Bagdonas, important considerations in the use of humor to support behavioral change include not picking topics too emotionally close to the other party and keeping the humor inclusive rather than an attack. Jokes should never be about another person’s identity or situation, and should not disparage a group or individual. Recognizing irony in a situation or a shared annoyance can be funny, but only when it is not at the expense of or pertinent only to people in a specific situation. These factors frequently make memes or other online attempts at humor distasteful. We have all seen the memes that capitalize on the “otherness” of a group. Sometimes we are in that group, and we feel excluded. Other times we are not in the targeted group, which makes us complicit in the disrespect. It is difficult but valuable to search for and capitalize on opportunities to share humor that enhances relationships and our interconnectedness by focusing on shared concerns or the universality of the human condition.  

On a personal level, I rarely share memes or other humor, but I will be more attentive than ever to the tone and object of ones that I choose to share. Being conscious of potential unintended meanings and ready to apologize and make amends for accidental missteps are also important considerations. Thinking twice before clicking on “share” is a good way to give oneself an extra moment to notice characteristics that might have unexpected meanings. 

Libraries and their staff demonstrate humor in display themes, signs, and funny fake statistics, many of which are noncontroversial and sometimes make fun of the industry itself. In addition to slowing people down to appreciate the joke, it humanizes the institution and hopefully makes the library a more welcoming environment and its information more credible as users develop a sense of connection through shared humor.  

Games/Gamification

Video games, role-playing games, and books are all good ways to experience life from another perspective. Making learning fun increases engagement in a learning experience and can take many forms. As noted in this 2015 article, libraries have been using game mechanics in real world activities to engage visitors, increase awareness of services, and enhance marketing. Most U.S. public libraries run some form of a summer reading or summer learning program, and libraries where I have worked are using systems like digital badging, cooperative achievements, and virtual leaderboards to enhance participation. Virtual reality is frequently seen as a gaming medium, but it can also be used to help people explore the world through the eyes of refugees or medical patients, helping students and potential caregivers to better understand future interactions. On a museum exhibit about the Titanic disaster, each visitor received a ticket for one of the passengers on the voyage. As they explored the exhibit, they could imagine the experience through the eyes of their assigned passenger, and find out at the end if that person survived the trip. This can better hold attention and increase engagement in the experiences of people living in a different world. 

While much of the gaming industry is dominated by marketing towards white, cis-gendered, heterosexual males, some gaming industry members are starting to see some isolated signs of progress towards better representation in the industry. Hopefully these games will serve as mirrors for players that share characteristics with the game figures, and as windows for other players to observe the game from a different perspective. As the industry expands in these directions, further investment and a broader audience can continue these transitions, leading to a more welcoming environment for all. 

Libraries can support these initiatives by curating their collections with special attention towards creators and intended audiences, much as they do for books, movies, and other collection materials. Libraries with a video game collection can intentionally include games such as Spider-Man: Miles Morales in their purchases, including replacing it when damaged or lost. When collections hold role-playing systems like Dungeons and Dragons, they can also seek systems by BIPOC and/or LGBTQ+ creators. A couple recent Kickstarter examples are Coyote and Crow and Into the Mother Lands. Library holdings do not typically include Kickstarter support, but if games become available for retail, they may be a niche market worth exploring, showing cultures and experiences reimagined through the eyes of creators frequently excluded from game writing. 

Conclusion

In a world of deep division and polarization, finding ways to connect people that hold very different views is vital to the pursuit of increased understanding. Only when people of differing perspectives can communicate constructively with each other is there room for progress. Much of our society is retreating into ever more isolated camps, and we have to work together to overcome these temptations and offer another way forward.  Some of these tactics may benefit participants trying to find solutions and create alliances. Working towards civility is not a positive goal when it means trying to support current systems with their inherent inequities. However, starting with strategies to catch the attention of the otherwise uninterested and possibly even inspire them to consider other points of view may be a way to open doors otherwise ignored by people not seeking to find them. How can we move through the world facilitating some of these discoveries and explorations? It seems essential to make the attempt.