I found this week’s readings really interesting as I could relate it to things that I’ve seen in my own life.

In the article by James Bridle, Bridle talks about the disturbing content that is being pushed towards children. I’d like to add to this, as I believe that short-form content (such as TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts) has only exacerbated this type of content. The algorithm continues to push these types of videos and being on short-form content makes it harder to ignore. Since there’s no thumbnail or title before entering the video, the viewer tends to watch all the way through so that they can get the gist of the video. I’ve seen examples of this within children that I know: inappropriate content showed up when watching and I tried to scroll past it, however the child was intrigued and intentionally scrolled back up to finish the video. I think that we’re really only seeing the consequences now as the “iPad kids” are now older and exploring the world. This raises the question of whose task is it to regulate content for children – should the companies constantly be on the lookout? Or should parents be diligently monitoring their children’s feeds?

The article by Mike Caulfield focuses on the importance of digital literacy. Although digital literacy has been being taught in schools, Caulfield says that they aren’t super effective. Because students have been given advice and tools, it isn’t working. The Peiyue reading tells the story of how someone conjured up an entire false history on Wikipedia. One that would have looked entirely real if it wasn’t looked at too deeply. If not for the author doing research, would this have ever been found out? It begs the question of how do we actually help people become more digitally literate? I think that a possible solution starts equipping people with helpful tools – Caulfield mentions sites like WolframAlpha, Snopes, Politifact, Stack Exchange, and Quote Investigator.

Lastly, it’s really interesting how people are becoming more trusting of social media as a news source, while losing trust in news corporations. I think this is tied to how it can feel like news corporations have control over what is published. With social media, anyone can publish anything so there’s less regulation and restraint, which could result in less filtered news. Also, comments on social media can act as a form of fact-checking, possibly lending reliability. It is also just more convenient to have news show up on your feed as opposed to having to seek it out yourself.