Online Verification Skills — Video 1: Introductory Video
Summary
TLDRMike 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
🕵️♂️ 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.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Truth
💡Fiction
💡Web
💡Training
💡Consequences
💡American Academy of Pediatrics
💡American College of Pediatricians
💡Credible Source
💡Stanford Researchers
💡Professional Fact Checkers
💡Web Native Skills
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.
Browse More Related Video
Sort Fact from Fiction Online with Lateral Reading
Introduction to Crash Course Navigating Digital Information #1
Fact Checkers (With MARIZ UMALI)
The Information Landscape
How Fake News Grows in a Post-Fact World | Ali Velshi | TEDxQueensU
The Fifth Macro Skill in Communication: Viewing || Grade 9 English || Quarter 3 Week 3
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)