淺談「假新聞」
最近上課時學到一個新單字「positionality」,讓我想到當前社群媒體上,不停看到的「fake news」——假新聞。
簡言之,「positionality」(位置性) 被定義為於種族、階級、性別、性取向以及能力等狀態中,創造你身分的社會與政治背景。位置性還描述了你的身分如何影響你對世界的理解與看法,以及潛在的偏見。
positionality 位置性;定位
https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/3390885/
https://www.lexico.com/definition/positionality
以下是我對「positionality」與 「fake news」的些許觀點:
“Fake news” has permeated all facets of life, ranging from social media interaction to presidential elections. Fake news can be defined as “fabricated information that mimics news media content in form but not in organizational process or intent” (Lazer et al., 2018, p. 1094). The creators and outlets of fake news do not ensure the accuracy and credibility of information, but rather disseminate misinformation or disinformation for purposes ranging from personal amusement to creating deceptions to achieve political aims. At times, fake news is created and disseminated by state or non-state actors using social media accounts and networks of bots designed to hijack feed algorithms of platforms such as Twitter or Facebook (Prier, 2017, p. 54). In the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, Facebook estimated that up to 60 million bots were used to post political content. Some of the same bots were then used in an attempt to influence the 2017 French election (Lazer et al., 2018, p. 1095). Such campaigns can be understood as a form of information warfare, a comprehensive attempt to control and influence every facet of the information supply chain, thereby influencing public opinion and behaviors. (Prier, 2017, p. 54). Often, fake news is not directly created by actors that seek to manipulate but by journalists or content creators whose content favors or aligns with the narratives of these actors (Doshi, 2020).
從社群媒體的互動到總統選舉,「假新聞」(fake news)已滲透至生活的各個層面。假新聞可被定義為「在形式上而非組織過程或意圖上,模仿新聞媒體內容所捏造的資訊」(Lazer et al., 2018, p. 1094)。無論是出於個人愛好或為達政治目的而有所欺瞞,假新聞的製造者與傳播管道並不保證資訊的準確性與可信度,反而是為了散播錯誤訊息(misinformation)或扭曲訊息(disinformation)。有時,假新聞是由國家或非國家行為者(state or non-state actors)所製造與傳播,藉由社群媒體帳號及網絡機器人來劫持諸如臉書與推特等平臺的推送演算法(Prier, 2017, p. 54)。在2016年的美國總統大選中,臉書估計有多達6千萬個機器人被用來發布政治貼文。其中,有部分機器人被用於影響隔年的法國大選(Lazer et al., 2018, p. 1095)。此類行動可視為資訊戰(information warfare)的一種形式,一種對控制與影響資訊供應鏈各環節的全面嘗試,從而影響公眾輿論與行為(Prier, 2017, p. 54)。假新聞通常是由記者或內容創造者(content creators)所創造,而非試圖操弄的行為者,前者的內容偏好符合後者的敘事(Doshi, 2020)。
Nevertheless, while the term “fake news” is commonplace, there is no universal, measurable way to quantify the fakeness or truthfulness of news. There are many fact-checking and media-bias detection tools, but they cannot objectively detect and clarify the more subtle and nuanced aims of manipulative actors that play a crucial role in news production. It can also be argued that the veracity of news depends not only on the actors that seek to manipulate it, but also on the positionality of its consumers. Therefore, one’s initial line of defense against misleading news lies not in the plethora of fact-checking devices but more in one’s pre-existing dispositions and skills to think and act in response to misleading information. This ability can be referred to as critical thinking, which can be more concretely expounded as “reasonable and reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do” (Ennis, 2011, p. 15).
然而,即便「假新聞」一詞隨處可見,卻沒有統一、可衡量的方式來量化新聞的虛假性或真實性。目前有許多事實查核與媒體偏見檢測工具,但它們無法客觀地檢測與說明行為操弄者更狡猾、更細緻的目標,而這些操弄者往往在新聞的生產中發揮著重要作用。我們也可以說,新聞的真實性不僅取決於試圖操弄它的行為者,同時還取決於新聞受眾的位置性。因此,一個人對抗誤導性新聞的第一道防線,不在於這些五花八門的事實查核方式,反而在於個人所固有的性格,以及針對誤導性資訊的思考與行動等相關技能。這種能力可稱為批判性思考(critical thinking),意即「專注於決定相信什麼或做什麼的理性思考與反思性思考」(Ennis, 2011, p. 15)。
Taiwan, also known as the Republic of China (ROC), is at the forefront of information warfare. It is wedged between the geopolitical struggles of global and regional hegemonies such as the United States and China, the People's Republic of China (PRC). Compounding the matter are the Taiwan’s own political actors vying for influence and power. This struggle seeps into all aspects of life and practice, mainly manifesting itself on social media, a battleground of information warfare. The Ministry of Education of Taiwan is cognizant of these information campaigns, and efforts have been made to introduce media literacy into all parts of its education system. According to the ministry, the government has tried to promote media literacy education since 2000 (MOE, 2002, p. 1), with one of its primary goals to cultivate its “citizens” abilities for independent learning, critical thinking, and problem solving” (MOE, 2002, p. 2).
臺灣,也被稱為中華民國,正處於資訊戰的最前線。這是全球霸權與地區霸權之間——如美國與中國(中華人民共和國)——的地緣政治對抗。使問題惡化的是臺灣自身的政治行動者對影響力與權力的奪取。這場對抗遍布於現實生活的各個面向,主要於社群媒體中——資訊戰的戰場——展露無遺。臺灣的教育部注意到了這些資訊的煙硝,並已努力將媒體素養引入其教育體系。據該部稱,自2000年以來,政府一直試圖推展媒體素養教育(MOE, 2002, p. 1),其主要目標之一是培養「公民獨立學習、批判性思考以及解決問題的能力。」(MOE, 2002, p. 2)。
★★★★★★★★★★★★
上述段落認為,由於個人的位置性(positionality),「假新聞」極難定義。此外,有許多人把不符合自身成見與偏好的新聞逕斥為假新聞。這其實相當危險,因為個人觀點將會變得愈發孤立與激進。
閱聽人應意識到,他們在網路上看到的每個資訊都有特定立場。是否真有毫無立場的新聞文章?為了對抗操弄性或強制性資訊(coercive information),我們必須意識到權力於個中的作用,以及我們自身的位置性如何形塑我們的詮釋。這是我們的第一道防線。
★★★★★★★★★★★★
參考文獻
Doshi, R. (2020, January). China steps up its information war in Taiwan. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved March, 21, 2021, from https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-01-09/china-steps-its-information-war-taiwan
Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational leadership, 43(2), 44-48.
Lazer, D. M., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., ... & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094-1096.
MOE (Ministry of Education), Taiwan. (2002). White paper on media literacy educational policy. Retrieved March, 21, 2021, from http://english.moe.gov.tw/public/Attachment/ 2122416591771.pdf
Prier, J. (2017). Commanding the trend: Social media as information warfare. Strategic Studies Quarterly: SSQ, 11(4), 50-85.
★★★★★★★★★★★★
教育時評: http://bit.ly/39ABON9
相關詞彙: https://bit.ly/2UncrfI
TED相關影片: https://bit.ly/3BDsDKl
「2017 foreign policy white paper」的推薦目錄:
- 關於2017 foreign policy white paper 在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於2017 foreign policy white paper 在 蕭叔叔英式英文學會 Uncle Siu's British English Club Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於2017 foreign policy white paper 在 Australian Foreign Policy in a contested Indo-Pacific Region 的評價
- 關於2017 foreign policy white paper 在 Foreign Policy White Paper 2017 | Facebook 的評價
2017 foreign policy white paper 在 蕭叔叔英式英文學會 Uncle Siu's British English Club Facebook 的最讚貼文
【#只談語言不論政治】英國Brexit專員David Davis向BBC解釋辭職原因
英國政壇大地震,現有Brexit secretary(脫歐事務大臣)David Davis昨天辭職,今日到Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson。
好多花生,也好多學英文的機會。
蕭叔叔
閱讀材料一《David Davis辭職公開信》
Dear Prime Minister
As you know there have been a significant number of occasions in the last year or so on which I have disagreed with the Number 10 policy line, ranging from accepting the Commission's sequencing of negotiations through to the language on Northern Ireland in the December Joint Report. At each stage I have accepted collective responsibility because it is part of my task to find workable compromises, and because I considered it was still possible to deliver on the mandate of the referendum, and on our manifesto commitment to leave the Customs Union and the Single Market.
I am afraid that I think the current trend of policy and tactics is making that look less and less likely. Whether it is the progressive dilution of what I thought was a firm Chequers agreement in February on right to diverge, or the unnecessary delays of the start of the White Paper, or the presentation of a backstop proposal that omitted the strict conditions that I requested and believed that we had agreed, the general direction of policy will leave us in at best a weak negotiating position, and possibly an inescapable one.
The Cabinet decision on Friday crystallised this problem. In my view the inevitable consequence of the proposed policies will be to make the supposed control by Parliament illusory rather than real. As I said at Cabinet, the "common rule book" policy hands control of large swathes of our economy to the EU and is certainly not returning control of our laws in any real sense.
I am also unpersuaded that our negotiating approach will not just lead to further demands for concessions.
Of course this is a complex area of judgement and it is possible that you are right and I am wrong. However, even in that event it seems to me that the national interest requires a Secretary of State in my Department that is an enthusiastic believer in your approach, and not merely a reluctant conscript. While I have been grateful to you for the opportunity to serve, it is with great regret that I tender my resignation from the Cabinet with immediate effect.
Yours ever
David Davis
閱讀材料二:《首相Theresa May公開回信》
Dear David
Thank you for your letter explaining your decision to resign as Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union.
I am sorry that you have chosen to leave the Government when we have already made so much progress towards delivering a smooth and successful Brexit, and when we are only eight months from the date set in law when the United Kingdom will leave the European Union.
At Chequers on Friday, we as the Cabinet agreed a comprehensive and detailed proposal which provides a precise, responsible, and credible basis for progressing our negotiations towards a new relationship between the UK and the EU after we leave in March. We set out how we will deliver on the result of the referendum and the commitments we made in our manifesto for the 2017 general election:
1. Leaving the EU on 29 March 2019.
2. Ending free movement and taking back control of our borders.
3. No more sending vast sums of money each year to the EU.
4. A new business-friendly customs model with freedom to strike new trade deals around the world.
5. A UK-EU free trade area with a common rulebook for industrial goods and agricultural products which will be good for jobs.
6. A commitment to maintain high standards on consumer and employment rights and the environment.
7. A Parliamentary lock on all new rules and regulations.
8. Leaving the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy.
9. Restoring the supremacy of British courts by ending the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the UK.
10. No hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, or between Northern Ireland and Great Britain.
11. Continued, close co-operation on security to keep our people safe.
12. An independent foreign and defence policy, working closely with the EU and other allies.
This is consistent with the mandate of the referendum and with the commitments we laid out in our general election manifesto: leaving the single market and the customs union but seeking a deep and special partnership including a comprehensive free trade and customs agreement; ending the vast annual contributions to the EU; and pursuing fair, orderly negotiations, minimising disruption and giving as much certainty as possible so both sides benefit.
As we said in our manifesto, we believe it is necessary to agree the terms of our future partnership alongside our withdrawal, reaching agreement on both within the two years allowed by Article 50.
I have always agreed with you that these two must go alongside one another, but if we are to get sufficient detail about our future partnership, we need to act now. We have made a significant move: it is for the EU now to respond in the same spirit.
I do not agree with your characterisation of the policy we agreed at Cabinet on Friday.
Parliament will decide whether or not to back the deal the Government negotiates, but that deal will undoubtedly mean the returning of powers from Brussels to the United Kingdom.
The direct effect of EU law will end when we leave the EU. Where the UK chooses to apply a common rulebook, each rule will have to be agreed by Parliament.
Choosing not to sign up to certain rules would lead to consequences for market access, security co-operation or the frictionless border, but that decision will rest with our sovereign Parliament, which will have a lock on whether to incorporate those rules into the UK legal order.
I am sorry that the Government will not have the benefit of your continued expertise and counsel as we secure this deal and complete the process of leaving the EU, but I would like to thank you warmly for everything you have done over the past two years as Secretary of State to shape our departure from the EU, and the new role the UK will forge on the world stage as an independent, self-governing nation once again.
You returned to Government after nineteen years to lead an entirely new Department responsible for a vital, complex, and unprecedented task.
You have helped to steer through Parliament some of the most important legislation for generations, including the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 and the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, which received Royal Assent last week.
These landmark Acts, and what they will do, stand as testament to your work and our commitment to honouring the result of the referendum.
Yours sincerely,
Theresa May
#迷上英式英文
2017 foreign policy white paper 在 Australian Foreign Policy in a contested Indo-Pacific Region 的必吃
... <看更多>