Online Verification Skills — Video 1: Introductory Video

Summary

Mike Caulfield introduces a critical issue in the digital age: discerning truth from fiction online. He emphasizes the importance of accurate information, particularly in consequential decisions like voting. Caulfield contrasts the credibility of the American Academy of Pediatrics with the American College of Pediatricians, highlighting the latter's controversial stance. He references a Stanford study showing that even experts struggle to identify credible sources quickly, unlike professional fact-checkers who excel due to their web-native skills. Caulfield promises to teach these skills to ensure users receive the best possible information.

Takeaways

• 🧐 Mike Caulfield is focused on teaching discernment between truth and fiction on the web.
• 🌐 The current digital age demands a new set of skills to navigate the web effectively.
• 🤔 The credibility of online information is crucial, especially for consequential decisions like voting.
• 🏥 The American Academy of Pediatrics is a reputable organization with a significant budget and membership.
• 🚫 The American College of Pediatricians is a controversial group, not recognized as a professional organization.
• 🔍 A study by Stanford researchers showed that even experts struggle to quickly identify credible sources online.
• 📊 Historians were indecisive, students often chose incorrectly, and fact-checkers performed best in identifying credible sources.
• ⏱️ Professional fact-checkers were able to quickly and accurately assess the credibility of sources.
• 🛠️ Fact-checkers use web-native skills that allow them to efficiently verify the truth of online content.
• 🎥 The next video will teach viewers how to employ these web-native skills to discern truth on the internet.

Q & A

Who is Mike Caulfield and what is his area of interest?

Mike Caulfield is a speaker who is fascinated with discerning truth from fiction on the web. His area of interest is in providing tools and skills to help people sort through information to ensure they are getting the most accurate and reliable data.

What is the current challenge people face with information on the web according to the script?

The current challenge is that people are increasingly going to the web for information, but almost none have had proper training on how to critically evaluate the credibility of online sources.

Why does the accuracy of information on the web matter?

The accuracy of information matters because it can impact significant decisions, such as voting for political representatives, where false information could lead to voting for someone who does not represent one's interests.

What is the American Academy of Pediatrics and why is it considered a credible source?

The American Academy of Pediatrics is an organization founded in the 1930s with a budget of around $80 million and 60,000 members. It is considered by pediatricians, scientists, and government as one of the premier authorities on the health and well-being of children, making it a credible source.

What is the American College of Pediatricians and why is it considered less credible?

The American College of Pediatricians was founded to protest the adoption of children by same-sex couples and is not a professional organization. It is considered by many to be a single-issue hate group, which diminishes its credibility.

What was the purpose of the study conducted by Stanford researchers?

The purpose of the study was to assess the ability of different groups to discern credible sources from less credible ones when presented with websites like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Pediatricians.

How did the Stanford students perform in the study?

In the study, 65% of the Stanford students incorrectly chose the website considered by many to be a hate site as the more credible source.

What was the performance of professional historians in the study?

Half of the professional historians in the study couldn't confidently determine which website was more credible.

Why did the professional fact-checkers perform better in the study?

The professional fact-checkers performed better because they utilized a set of web-native skills that allowed them to quickly and accurately assess the credibility of the sources.

What is the main takeaway from the fact-checkers' performance in the study?

The main takeaway is that with the right set of skills, one can efficiently discern the credibility of online information, which is crucial in an era where misinformation is prevalent.

What does Mike Caulfield plan to do in the next video?

In the next video, Mike Caulfield plans to demonstrate how to use the skills that the fact-checkers employed to quickly get to the truth of information found on the web.

Outlines

00:00

🕵️‍♂️ Discerning Truth from Fiction Online

Mike Caulfield introduces himself as someone fascinated by the challenge of distinguishing truth from fiction on the web. He aims to provide tools to help others do the same. He discusses the current transition where people rely on the web for information but lack training in critically evaluating it. Caulfield emphasizes the importance of accurate information, especially in making consequential decisions like voting, where misinformation can lead to voting against one's own interests. He expresses his core interest in equipping individuals with the skills to ensure they receive the best possible information. Caulfield contrasts two websites: the American Academy of Pediatrics, a reputable organization, and the American College of Pediatricians, which is not a professional organization and is considered by many to be a hate group. He highlights the difficulty in discerning the credibility of these sites, referencing a study by Stanford researchers where even professional historians and students struggled to identify the more credible source within a five-minute timeframe. However, professional fact-checkers were able to quickly and accurately determine the more credible source, indicating their use of web-native skills to swiftly ascertain the truth.

Keywords

💡Truth

Truth refers to the quality or state of being in accordance with fact or reality. In the context of the video, the speaker is concerned with discerning accurate information from falsehoods on the internet, which is crucial for making informed decisions, such as voting. The video emphasizes the importance of being able to identify truth to ensure that one's actions are based on reliable and factual information.

💡Fiction

Fiction is a term used to describe something that is invented or imagined, not based on fact or reality. The video script contrasts truth with fiction to highlight the challenge of distinguishing real from fake information online. It is used to illustrate the potential consequences of believing in false narratives, such as making uninformed decisions.

💡Web

The term 'web' in this context refers to the World Wide Web, a system of interlinked hypertext documents accessed via the Internet. The video discusses the web as a primary source of information for many people, but also points out the lack of training in critically evaluating the credibility of web-based information.

💡Training

Training, in the video, refers to the process of acquiring skills or knowledge, often through education or practice. The speaker notes the lack of training in using the web effectively to discern credible information, which is a significant issue given the web's role as a primary source of information for many.

💡Consequences

Consequences in this video script imply the results or effects of an action or decision. The speaker uses the term to emphasize the importance of accurate information, as false information can lead to negative outcomes, such as voting for a candidate who does not represent one's interests.

💡American Academy of Pediatrics

The American Academy of Pediatrics is mentioned in the video as a credible organization with a significant budget and membership, recognized as an authority on child health. It serves as an example of a reliable source of information, contrasting with the American College of Pediatricians.

💡American College of Pediatricians

The American College of Pediatricians is described as an organization founded with a specific agenda, not recognized as a professional organization, and considered by many as a hate group. It is used in the video to illustrate how easily one might be misled by a source that appears credible but is not.

💡Credible Source

A credible source in the video is defined as a reliable and trustworthy provider of information. The speaker discusses the difficulty in identifying credible sources, especially when comparing the American Academy of Pediatrics with the American College of Pediatricians, where the latter is not a credible source despite appearing professional.

💡Stanford Researchers

Stanford researchers are mentioned as having conducted a study to assess the ability of different groups to identify credible sources. Their study is used to highlight the challenges even educated individuals face in discerning the credibility of information on the web.

💡Professional Fact Checkers

Professional fact checkers are introduced in the video as individuals with specialized skills in quickly verifying the credibility of information. They are contrasted with other groups in the Stanford study, demonstrating their effectiveness in identifying the American Academy of Pediatrics as the more credible source.

💡Web Native Skills

Web native skills refer to the set of abilities or techniques that are particularly suited for use on the internet. The video suggests that fact checkers possess such skills, which allow them to efficiently determine the veracity of information online, a critical capability in the digital age.

Highlights

Mike Caulfield introduces himself as someone fascinated with discerning truth from fiction on the web.

The web is a transition point where people seek information without proper training on how to use it effectively.

The importance of accurate information is highlighted, especially in consequential decisions like voting.

False information can lead to voting for a candidate who does not represent one's interests.

The goal is to provide skills to ensure the information received is as accurate as possible.

Introduction of the American Academy of Pediatrics as a reputable source on child health.

Contrast with the American College of Pediatricians, which is not a professional organization and has a different agenda.

Stanford researchers conducted a study to see how well people can discern credible sources.

Historians were unsure about the credibility of the websites, with half unable to decide.

Stanford students chose the less credible source as more credible in 65% of the cases.

Professional fact-checkers correctly identified the credible source 100% of the time.

Fact-checkers were able to make accurate judgments quickly, within seconds.

The difference in performance is attributed to the fact-checkers' web-native skills.

Mike Caulfield aims to teach viewers these web-native skills to quickly get to the truth.

The next video will start teaching these skills for discerning truth on the web.

Transcripts

My name’s Mike Caulfield.

I am fascinated with how to sort truth from fiction on the web, and I’m here to give

you a simple set of tools that will help you to do the same.

The particular moment that we’re in right now is a moment of transition where we’re

all going to the web for information, but almost none of us have had true training in

how to use it.

Some people wonder what does it matter whether something on the internet is true or not and

for a lot of things it doesn’t.

But for a lot of decisions you make there are consequences and the most obvious of those

is you’ll eventually vote for somebody and you’ll vote based on the information that

you have.

If that information is false, you may end up voting for someone that doesn’t actually represent

your interests.

My core interest is how can we give you the skills to make sure that information you’re

getting is the best possible information that you can get.

So, I want to show two websites.

This here is the first website.

If you can see this, this is the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Now the American Academy of Pediatrics is an organization founded in the 1930s, a budget of

something like $80 million, 60,000 members, considered by pediatricians, scientists,

and government as one of the premier authorities on the health and well-being of children,

okay.

On the other hand, this is the American College of Pediatricians.

Now, the American College of Pediatricians was founded to protest the adoption of children

by same sex couples, okay.

It’s not a professional organization, it’s considered by many to be a single-issue hate

group.

So, these two sites are from completely different universes and it should be pretty easy to

tell them apart, right?

Some Stanford researchers recently looked at just that issue.

They took three sets of people.

Stanford students, professional historians, and professional fact checkers, sat them down

in front of a computer and gave them 5 minutes to figure out which would be the more credible

source.

So, how did they do?

Well the answer is not very well.

First, let’s talk about the historians.

Half of the historians couldn’t say for sure which site was the more credible site.

The Stanford students, how did they do?

Sixty-five percent actually chose the website considered by many to be a hate site as the more credible source.

Finally, we had the professional fact checkers.

The professional fact checkers, one hundred percent of them got it right and not only

did they get it right, but they got it right quickly.

A lot of people in the other groups used their full five minutes.

These fact checkers got it right in seconds.

So, what accounts for that difference?

The fact checkers, they used a set of skills that are web native.

A set of skills that help them very quickly get to the truth of the matter.

I want to show you how to use those skills and that’s what we’re gonna start to do

in the next video.