That system is in decline. Now we live in a peer-to-peer information ecosystem. Discourse happens everywhere, all at once. And every one of us is now the first point of contact with information.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
That means verification can’t be outsourced anymore. It has to happen at the moment of contact, before information is believed, shared, or acted on. Which means critical thinking can’t be an optional skill. It has to be the foundation.
This is laudible and I agree but its just not going to happen across every demographic. We need to have the uncomfortable discussion of the value of democtratised news versus national/global interest. I am aware of where that takes us.
Why does it need to? It simply requires that a significant minority (but a majority of the engaged) agree to a shared reality. That hasn't changed, we just need critical thinking among the engaged, and that can be taught.
My difficulty with this is that a significant number can’t do thinking, let alone the critical kind. I’m sceptical that it can be taught. Remember that half the population is of below-average intelligence.
We need to embed verification, sourcing, logic, and information literacy not as extra modules, but as core cognitive tools, woven through every subject from K–12 onwards. This isn’t about resisting disinformation. It’s about surviving an epistemic environment with collapsing gatekeepers
Unfortunately it starts with oneself. Sound epistemics are a character test I suppose.
Forcing oneself to doubt feelgood opinions, and not to reject annoying points out of hand. Treating arguments not as a power game even when your opposite does.
When I was young, teaching kifs critical thinking was the buzz word, and I kept wondering when that was supposed to be happening. Because there was little in school that seemed to actually teach it.
I do my best to encourage my kid to question the motives and techniques of the media he consumes.
Speaking for Belgium at least this is starting to happen, my kids (now 22 and 20) had this sort of training at school. And kudos to orgs like @liedetectors.bsky.social who are working on this.
If we don't equip people to verify information themselves, we leave them at the mercy of those who weaponise doubt. This is the new civic skill set.
Critical thinking isn’t an academic ideal anymore. It’s the new infrastructure of democracy
This is exactly why I’m running for office with POSIWID, the Purpose Of a System Is What It Does, as my MAGA. When we train people to see systems not for what they say they are, but for what they actually do, we empower them to break free from illusion and narrative manipulation.
The core of POSIWID is about pulling back the veil, seeing function over intention, and realizing that outcomes are the ideology. In an era where gatekeepers are crumbling and verification has become peer-to-peer, the POSIWID Principle turns every citizen into an epistemic detective.
It helps people understand that disinformation isn't just the content of a lie, it’s the structure of a system that benefits from incoherence. If a policy claims to be about liberty but results in mass surveillance? That’s its purpose.
This sounds great, but can you spell out for us how people are supposed to actually do this? None of us personally are able to observe all newsworthy events in person and/or speak with eyewitnesses, which is why we have a press (however imperfect it may be).
You’re right, Shawna, most of us can’t be everywhere at once, and we do need institutions like the press. But even then, we can learn to interrogate the information we receive by applying something called the POSIWID Principle: The Purpose Of a System Is What It Does.
It's not about omniscience. It’s about recognizing patterns. You don’t have to guess intent, you look at consistent outcomes. If a system says it’s meant to inform, but reliably misinforms or omits truth to serve power, then its real purpose is control, not truth.
Thank you. I certainly agree that critical thinking and media literacy skills are important. My point is that if we assume we don't have broadly trustworthy media outlets or similar sources of information in the first place, we'll never get to the truth through critical thinking alone.
If we are to survive- let alone thrive-we need to think outside of the box & really change our value system.
We need involved critically minded citizens rather than consumers of dross.
Caring-on all levels-is currently completely undervalued while social & economic vandalism seem to be rewarded...
... Schools seem to be churning out meek consumers rather than critically minded citizens. The media constantly blurs the lines between news, politics and entertainment. People are baited to react viscerally to soundbites and slogans rather than seek context and nuance...
But yes, it starts at our schools: citizenship, critical thinking, questioning,...
And bring back debating clubs. In my view hugely undervalued. Teaching kids to listen to the other side, underpin arguments with facts, encourage nuance, express feelings in a civilised way,... All vital.
The cure you’re proposing is horrendously difficult, intellectually exhausting, and very long term. It’s not going to work for the common people who are too busy with the Kardashians and wouldn’t mind a dictator as long as they’re left with some level of economic security.
I don't view democracy as being a category of government, but a constant process, where it can move towards functional ideals of verification, deliberation, and accountability or regress away from them towards authoritarianism.
Everything that moves us towards those ideals are going to be difficult and long term, because as soon as we stop democracy stagnants, turns into performance and eventually regresses to authoritarianism.
To be honest, it always has been, but the US has allowed the right wing to continuously dumb down the population for decades. And the stupidity of right wing media is the icing on the cake.
A big issue, though, is that currently many people simplistically equate "critical thinking" with "doubting mainstream media / challenging authority". There are enough bad actors who spread disinformation or conspiracy theories under the cloak of "thinking critically".
It's also about restraint though. Instead of seeing something and thinking, "I need to share this asap; everyone should know", it's about thinking: is that really LA today? How can I determine that?
I have difficulty resisting the share button. It's a fight I have with myself all the time, even from supposedly trusted sources. New sites sometimes just punt things out there, no checks
Ted has a longer writeup about this (I'd not necessarily 100% agree on everything), but be careful to underestimate human biases and assume "bad decisions" are statistically due just to "lack" of critical thinking by those who make them https://substack.com/@tedgioia/note/p-165359384
And with AI, we have an excellent tool for producing a mix of reliable and unreliable statements that students should subject to their critical skills incessantly.
It always has been, and that most didn't learn it at school is a feature of power, not a bug. We don't have time to grow it in the next generation and rely upon that; every person has to have these skills, and when we meet one who lacks them, we are responsible for trying to show how to use them.
When my kids were in junior school I asked their teachers to teach them the three Rs, how to ask a question, and how to validate the answer. Response? It's not in the curriculum.
We need to make sure that one can not build their whole careers on lies. A small lie "Raw milk is good for you" feeds a woo woo podcaster and willing scientists. A big one "The election is rigged" feeds a whole system.
Comments
You could build AIs to do so, but they would again be biased by those designing them.
Oh, wait....
https://bsky.app/profile/wilhelmusjanus.bsky.social/post/3lpow7calqk2r
Hope more people in positions of power heed your words.
I agree, education is a fundamental key here.
It’s unrealistic and eliminates the key role of reputation. Every endeavor of significance involves many people.
Bellingcat is trusted because many individuals stood for a certain methodology.
Forcing oneself to doubt feelgood opinions, and not to reject annoying points out of hand. Treating arguments not as a power game even when your opposite does.
All for the dubious joy of having an open mind.
I do my best to encourage my kid to question the motives and techniques of the media he consumes.
Critical thinking isn’t an academic ideal anymore. It’s the new infrastructure of democracy
Actually makes me want to log off.
https://respectfulconversation.charlotte.edu/media-literacy-teaching-and-learning-resources/
We need involved critically minded citizens rather than consumers of dross.
Caring-on all levels-is currently completely undervalued while social & economic vandalism seem to be rewarded...
And bring back debating clubs. In my view hugely undervalued. Teaching kids to listen to the other side, underpin arguments with facts, encourage nuance, express feelings in a civilised way,... All vital.
Powered by @skywriter.blue
Otherwise you can never block untrustworthy users out of your timeline and will there not be any consequences for fakery.