What do we do about “fake news” and other forms of false information: The roles of the organization of false information, professional ethics and information literacy?

Abstract

False information, of which the most dominant types in the current disinformation marketplace are fake news or disinformation, seems to be ubiquitous these days, with little certainty about how to solve the problems they bring. In this panel, we discuss a taxonomy of types of false information, which will help us better understand the phenomenon and how to address it. We note that simply restricting access to or censoring false information will likely be ineffective and counter to professional information ethics. Instead, the way forward is to promote and practice meaningful information literacy.

The role of libraries in the fake news era: a survey of information scientists and library science students in Greece

“…All these terms are interrelated. What is worrying is the speed, accuracy and potential for news creation that has increased dramatically with modern audio and image editing technology (Oltmann et al, 2018). Fake news is a complex phenomenon with many definitions.…”

“…There are many tools that offer users significant help in obtaining reliable information and limiting search results, but they cannot completely eliminate the need to evaluate information sources (Rose-Wiles, 2018). According to the American Library Association (A.L.A., 2017), basic services such as teaching information literacy, access to accurate information for all and assistance to users of all ages are now the most important elements than ever (Rosa, 2017; Oltomann et al. , 2018).…”

Information source and content: articulating two key concepts for information evaluation

“…In the current post-truth climate various types of inaccurate information have increasingly pervaded the internet, particularly disinformation (Calvert, 2001;Fallis, 2015;Hernon, 1995; Information source and content Lynch, 2001;Piper, 2002;Rubin and Conroy, 2012;Skinner and Martin, 2000;Whitty et al, 2012). Scholars and professionals across disciplines and fields of practice have proposed personal, legal, technical and educational models and solutions to understand and tackle their spread (Agarwal and Alsaeedi, 2020;Auberry, 2018;Delellis and Rubin, 2020;Elmwood, 2020;Karlova and Fisher, 2013;Mathiesen, 2019;Neely-Sardon and Tignor, 2018;Oltmann, Froehlich, and Agosto, 2018;Vamanu, 2019;Young, 2021). In particular, information scholars and professionals have reflected on or developed frameworks for information evaluation to be used in information literacy instruction in schools and libraries (Cullen, 2014;Elmborg, 2006;Lloyd and Talja, 2010;Musgrove et al, 2018;Swanson, 2004;Walsh, 2010).…”

The Relevance of Discursive Strategies to Information Evaluation Practices

“…Recent work across disciplines has examined the current post-truth climate and various types of information disorders, Poroi 17,2 (May 2022) which have permeated the internet (Calvert, 2001;Fallis, 2004Fallis, , 2015Hernon, 1995;Lynch, 2001;Piper, 2002;Rubin & Conroy, 2012;Skinner & Martin, 2000;Whitty et al, 2012). Scholars and professionals across disciplines and fields of practice have elaborated personal, legal, technical, and educational models and solutions to make sense of these phenomena and contain them (Agarwal & Alsaeedi, 2020;Auberry, 2018;Delellis & Rubin, 2020;Elmwood, 2020;Karlova & Fisher, 2013;Mathiesen, 2019;Neely-Sardon & Tignor, 2018;Oltmann, Froehlich, & Agosto, 2018;Vamanu, 2019;Vamanu & Zak, 2022;Young, 2021). In particular, information scholars and professionals have articulated information evaluation frameworks for information literacy instruction in schools and libraries (Cullen, 2014;Elmborg, 2006;Lloyd & Talja, 2010;Mercer, 2018;Musgrove, 2021;Swanson, 2004;Walsh, 2010).…”