EVALUATING THE LEVEL OF MEDIA LITERACY AMIDST THE PANDEMIC:

THE CASE OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS OF

IBN SIENA INTEGRATED SCHOOL FOUNDATION

(Chapter 1)

1.1 Introduction

Media literacy in the modern world is a set of skills, abilities that allow

users to analyze media messages broadcast through the media and the Internet,

the ability to critically approach the received data and the perceived information

(Anna et al., 2021).

After the worldwide spread of the Covid-19 virus, governments have

imposed various health protocols and measures to mitigate its spread, and one

of the most notable of these measures are the quarantines and lockdowns. With

these measures, people’s dependency on the media increased to gather relevant

information and communicate with their loved ones and friends. According to the

Global Web Index Coronavirus Multi-Market Study (2020), the pandemic shows

an increase in the use of online and digital activities, from a data gathered from

people aged 16 to 64 in selected countries.

The role of media in the modern world as a convenient source of

information and as a means of communication also has its downsides and

consequences when users and audiences don’t have the ability to traverse the

media with great critical thinking skills, which can lead to mass misinformation.
This can be partially blamed to the rapid globalization of modern media, due to

which flow of information is uncontrolled, especially in Internet communication

(Shevchenko et al., 2021). The exponential and gradual evolution of fake

information and its extensive swindle to democracy, informational reliability and

the public’s media trustworthiness has increased the necessity for undertaking

academic researches about fake information (Zhou and Zafarani, 2018). In

pandemic, communication efforts were maintained continuously to inform the

public, raise awareness, take precaution and to eventually mitigate the pandemic

so as to prevent national health system from collapsing (Sezgin et al., 2020). But

such efforts are challenged with problems such as the spread of false

information, conspiracies, and unverifiable contents with some of it ranging from

ridiculous to outright concerning if taken seriously by a number of people. This

mass misinformation at its extreme can lead to a tragic outcome. A research from

World Health Organization has stated that acting on the wrong information can

kill. In the first 3 months of 2020, nearly 6000 people around the globe were

hospitalized because of coronavirus misinformation, where 800 people may have

died because of it.

The call to raise awareness and showcase the dangers of media has led

to the introduction of MIL (Media and Information Literacy) in the Philippines as

early as 2011 to prepare teaching materials for teachers that would help them

analyze and evaluate media (Siricharoen, 2012). In Philippines, the most recent

and significant achievement in media and information literacy education is its

inclusion in senior high school (SHS) curriculum (Bautista Jr, 2021). Internet has
become very accessible in the Philippines, that Filipinos are one of the top users

of it today. With its accessibility to Filipinos, media misinformation has become

rampant in the Philippines. Vergel Santos, a veteran newspaper journalist and

chairman of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR),

recollected his experiences of Philippine Media in pre, during, post-martial law

years. According to him, media in pre-martial law years were much simpler as

compared today. He pointed out that the problem with the cyber world is the

anonymity of source, thus the absence of accountability to everything online

connected to the proliferation of fake news (Talusan, 2019). This pandemic has

shown the dangerous spread of not just the virus, but also the spread of fake

information as well. The Department of Health (DOH) had called on the public to

rely only on authorities and experts for information on Covid-19 and government

response to the pandemic.

“In these uncertain times, someone has to stand up with conviction and

say ‘No more!’ to spreading inaccurate information about Covid-19.”- Abdul Rauf

Lumabao, a Covid-19 front liner from Lanao del Sur. Lanao del Sur, a province

from the southern Philippines with Marawi city as its capital, is considered as the

poorest province in the country. It has long struggled with the weakest healthcare

system, with the pandemic increasing the region’s vulnerability on top of the

ongoing humanitarian situation (Maitem, 2020). Adding to the current situation is

the spread of false information about Covid-19 and Covid-19 vaccines which has

been holding back the efforts of the region’s health workers. False information

such as the belief that vaccines can cause your arm, particularly the site of
injection area to be magnetic, while some are still not convinced on the existence

of such virus believing that it is just a conspiracy.

With the newly implemented MIL (Media and Information Literacy) in

senior high school, this study focuses on the senior high school students of Ibn

Siena Integrated School Foundation, an integrated school located at Biyaba

Damag, Marawi City. This study aims to determine and evaluate the level of

media literacy of the said senior high school students in the context of a

pandemic crisis and explore their media usage as they are confined in their

homes because of the face to face class restriction.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Due to the pandemic, people were forced to turn to different media as a

main source of acquiring information and as a means of communication. With its

increase of dependency for seeking relevant information, the spread of

disinformation, propagandas, unverifiable contents, and conspiracies also

increased along-side it. Thus, this study aims to determine and evaluate the level

of media literacy among senior high school students of Ibn Siena Integrated

School Foundation during the pandemic.

Specifically, this study sought to answer the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of;

 1.1 Gender

1.2 Grade Level

1.3 Social Status

2. What is the level of usage of respondents in each different media during

the pandemic crisis?

2.1 Traditional Media

2.1.1 Televisions

2.1.2 Print Media

2.2 Digital Media

2.2.1 Social Media

2.2.2 Websites and Blogs

2.2.3 Text Messaging and Calls

3. What is the media literacy level of the respondents given their shown

attitudes and competencies in navigating the media based on the five core

concepts of media literacy in the context of a pandemic crisis?

3.1 Authorship

3.2 Format

3.3 Content

3.4 Audience

3.5 Purpose

4. Is there a significant relationship between the respondents’ profile and

their level of media literacy in the context of a pandemic crisis?

 5. Is there a significant relationship between the level of usage on different

media of the respondents and their level of media literacy in the context of

a pandemic crisis?

1.3 Statement of Hypothesis

The following null hypothesis will be tested at 0.05 level of significance:

1. There is no significant relationship between the profile of the respondents

and their level of media literacy in the context of a pandemic crisis.

2. There is no significant relationship between the level of use on different

media of the respondents and their level of media literacy in the context of

a pandemic crisis.
1.4 Conceptual Framework

The Figure 1 below serves as the basis and framework for this research.

The study wants to determine the level of media literacy of the respondents

within the five core concepts of media literacy. To draw a comprehensive

conclusion, the study considered four main factors that may affect their level of

media literacy which will serve as the study’s independent variables.

Independent
Variable Dependent Variable

Profile of the
Respondents
1. Gender
2. Grade Level Level of Media Literacy
3. Social Status within the Five Core
Concepts of Media
Literacy
 Authorship
 Format
 Content
Level of Usage on  Audience
Media
 Purpose
(Traditional and
Digital Media)
 Figure 1.1 Schematic Diagram

1.5 Scope and Limitation

This study was to be conducted on the senior high school students of Ibn

Siena Integrated School Foundation during the school year of 2021-2022 which

is still in the course of a pandemic crisis. Ibn Siena Integrated School Foundation

was located at Biyaba Damag, Marawi City. Since the city was home to a

culturally Muslim ethnic group called Meranao, majority of the respondents was

also expected to be a Meranao. The school had to resort to distance learning

specifically modular learning after the face-to-face classes were prohibited as all

schools in the Philippines. Moreover, the senior high school students were

chosen as the respondents for the study because of the newly implemented

subject called Media and Information Literacy (MIL) which was taught in the first

semester of grade 12 students (in the case of this school), but not in grade 11

students.
 This study was focused on to determine the respondents’ level of media

literacy based on the five core concepts (authorship, format, audience, content,

purpose) of media literacy in the context of a pandemic crisis. There are only a

four factors that were considered as to which is affecting their media literacy. In

this is study they are the (gender, grade level, social status, and level of usage of

different media), so other factors that are unique to each respondent are not

included.

1.6 Significance of the Study

The advent of Digital Media as a main source of information today

because of its convenience and accessibility has also shown to us when the flow

of information is unregulated can result to mass misinformation. One way to

combat this problem is to educate its users about media for them to be able to

critically analyze and understand the nature and impacts of media messages and

productions. The pandemic crisis that we are facing today has shown to us that if

we did not take this problem seriously, it can lead to a catastrophic information

crisis. We can see this how during the early days of pandemic, Anti-Asian racism,

discrimination and hate crimes increased worldwide especially towards the

people of East Asian descent (Parveen, 2021). The same way how hate crimes

against the Muslims of India increased because of the phrase “Corona Jihad”

which was popularized by the Hindu-Nationalist media (Bajpai, 2021). As months

pass by, we can see in the Internet how various conspiracies spread such as

COVID-19 being a fake virus orchestrated by China, COVID-19 vaccines

containing microchips that can track you, and wearing of facemasks can reduce

your oxygen level (Lewis, 2020). Some corporations took advantage of the

pandemic to sell their unproven and dangerous products that promise to heal

COVID-19 disease. Such dangerous spread of fake information calls for the need

of Media education. People have long overlooked the importance of Media

literacy, and this is evident on how Media and Information Literacy as a subject

was only included in the grade 12 level of K-12 curriculum in the Philippines just

recently.

Media literacy is a new and advancing area, which still has little to no

research conducted in the area to date (Kiernan, 2017). The findings of this study

will add to the current existing knowledge and can make us reconsider some

things on how to approach it properly. The result of this study are beneficial to

the following:

Educational Institutions. The respondents of this study were students of senior

high school. The findings of this study will help the educational legislators to

reconsider what is the best approach to teach Media and Information Literacy.

Since only the Grade 12 students were taught by the said subject (at least in the

school where the study was conducted), we can draw a fruitful conclusion on the

findings of this study.

Students: Students will realize the influence of media upon them on how they

see the world. The study will make them reflect on themselves since the

respondents are also students themselves. They will be more aware and

engaged the next time they use media.

Government Health Officials: This study was conducted in the time of a

COVID-19 pandemic crisis. The findings of this study will show why media

literacy are also important during a health-crisis to stop the spread of harmful

information.

Future Researchers. The study can serve as a basis for future researches.

There are a lot of possible related topics and problems to explore after this study

because it is still a new area with little to no research conducted to date.

1.7 Definition of Terms

 Level of Media Usage- In this study, it refers on how often the

respondents use the media in gathering relevant information during the

pandemic.

 Media- refers to the communication channels through which we

disseminate news, music, movies, education, promotional messages and

other data (marketbusinessnews.com).

 Media Diversity- In this study, it refers on the diversity of the media that

the respondents are using to gather relevant information during the

pandemic.
 Media Literacy- Media literacy in the modern world is a set of skills,

abilities that allow users to analyze media messages broadcast through

the media and the Internet, the ability to critically approach the received

data and the perceived information (Anna et al., 2021).

 Pandemic- In this study, it specifically refers to the pandemic brought by

the COVID-19 disease. A pandemic is a disease outbreak that spreads

across countries or continents

(webmd.com).
 (Chapter 2)

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction

This chapter presents a comprehensive discussion of the existing related

literature that was already established in the field. This will help the audience of

this study to make sense of the full context behind the research problem that the

study was trying to find and answer. It provides an overview and discussion with

details on some part on what we call as Media, Media Literacy and the five core

concepts of Media Literacy. It also gives a brief discussion on Fake Information

and its dangerous effect especially in the time of a pandemic crisis. Then it will

show the various related studies or research regarding the level of Media literacy

in the time of the pandemic crisis and the factors that affect the media literacy

that were considered in this study. Since there was a lack of related literature

from the field locally, a number of related literatures that were presented here

were literatures from all around the world.

2.1 Media and its two types: Traditional and Digital

To understand what we generally call as Media or The Media, it refers to

the communication channels through which we disseminate news, music,

movies, education, promotional messages, and other data

(marketbusiness.com). Mass Media are media, which can be used to

communicate and interact with a large number of audiences. Traditional or

Digital, mass media are inseparable part of our lives (Manohar, 2011).

Before the Internet Age, media was simple and straightforward with a one

way of communication with its audiences (Lawlor, 2018). Televisions, radio

broadcasting, and print media such as newspapers, magazines, and leaflets

were the most common media at that time to spread an information to a number

of people. Today, they have become known as the Traditional Media (Davis,

2019). With the rise of Internet, Traditional Media are slowly becoming a thing of

the past. Digital Media, as we now call it, are any form of media that uses

electronic devices for distribution. They are today commonly used as software,

video games, websites, and of course social media (Preston, 2018). Some

traditional media such as televisions and radios use electronic devices too, but

what sets them apart to the new media that we now call as digital media is the

difference in interactivity (Smith, 2013).

In terms of convenience, the digital media are by far the most accessible

and easy to use, as they are now the preferred means of staying up to date with

news and current affairs. Users can now participate in a near real-time

journalistic coverage, unlike before where they are just passive audiences. They

can even create an online content of their own, as news organizations were not

able to keep up with the demand. As new contents are being published, it is

becoming more and more harder for the audience to check and validate all this

material (Caled and Silva, 2021).

 But despite all these drawbacks, the digital media is still becoming more

popular especially to the adolescents, and traditional media are slowly becoming

out of favor. A study of trends of media use from 1976 to 2016 in the United

States has shown that average 12th graders in 2016 were spending more than

twice as much time as online as in 2006, where they averagely spend 6hrs of

their time in it. Reading a book and watching television from the same age group

also has significantly declined (Twenge et al., 2020).

2.2 Media Literacy

2.2.1 Development of Media Literacy

As media are becoming more advanced and sophisticated over the past

decades, a new set of questions and problems also rises that needed to be

answered and addressed. For the most part of history, majority of populations

are illiterate. Only a few rich and lucky people can have access to written works.

But thanks to the invention of Guttenberg printing press, print media has become

widely accessible, which in turn led to the increase of literacy. It is during this

time that a media can reach a lot of people, where newspapers were serving as

the first mass media.

 At first, newspapers were controlled by the government, but due to fear of

information censorship, people pushed the democratization of news. The

accessibility to print media spread like a wildfire, especially among the middle

and lower classes. But newspapers as a means of spreading relevant

information, were also as a means of making lots of money. Due to the incentive

of making money from advertisements, people were concern about them for

choosing profits over truth. But it didn’t just stop there, for the next decades,

another medium will revolutionize how we spread information. From the radio

broadcasting, motion pictures that produced televisions, and then the major

advancement of them all which is Internet which literally changed the media

landscape again. Ordinary people can now create their own media which has

little to no regulations at all, which means they can almost do whatever they

want. From people being concerned for the access of media, to the concerns

being shifted to analyzing and evaluating media because of the rise of digital

media, this has become the fundamental concepts of media literacy (Smooth,

2018).

2.2.2 Media Literacy and Media Education in Today’s World

It may surprise you that media literacy of the general population was often

put under the rug despite media being one of the most influential tools today. The

pandemic has greatly exposed this, and fortunately many people and even some
governmental institutions has finally stepped in to do something. Now what

exactly is media literacy? The European Commission (2007) defined media

literacy as “the ability to access the media, to understand and critically evaluate

different aspects of the media and media contents and to create communications

in a variety of contexts”.

Why media literacy is very important? The media landscape is

increasingly becoming more complex, especially during the advent of new media.

Sometimes, this massive flow of information was overwhelming. Media literacy

can help a person to be smart in consuming products and information and will

help them distinguish whether an information is credible. It will also help them to

recognize different point of view, and most importantly a responsible creators of

media (commonsensemedia).

Hans Schmidt, an associate professor of communication, expressed his

frustration that despite media have become a bigger part of the learning

experience at all levels of education, there has continued to be little time devoted

to actually teaching the media. But then COVID-19 pandemic struck, now even

teachers and instructors who rarely used technology are realizing that they have

no choice but to devote their time to teach about using technology in an

educational setting (Schmidt, 2021). This struggle to integrate media literacy

curricula into the educational system have been going on since the mid-20 th

century.
 The oldest organization studying Media Literacy is the National Telemedia

Council (NTC). A project by Center for Media Literacy (CML) called The Voices

of Media provided historical context for the rise of media literacy from individuals

who helped influence the field (Jolls, 2019). One of the main objective of these

organizations is to push for the inclusion of Media Education in the educational

system. In North America, Canada was the first country to require media literacy

in school curriculum (Beskorsa, 2020). In Southeast Asia, Philippines is among

the first country to adapt Media and Information Literacy as part of the K-12 basic

education curriculum. The Department of Health included Media and Information

Literacy as part of the core subjects under the communication learning area for

senior highs school, with one semester allocation for either Grade 11 or Grade

12 (teacherph).

2.2.3 The Five Core Concepts of Media Literacy

Processing information requires process skills. Today, in order to

participate from the day to day events and media information, one needs the

skills to access, analyze, evaluate, create and participate with media information

(Thoman and Jolls, 2008). The five core concepts of media literacy were

developed by Elizabeth Thoman, who founded the Center for Media Literacy

(CML) in 1989. It was a concept that was derived from the previous eight core

concepts of media literacy which were presented first through the combined

ideas of Len Masterman and Barry Duncan which served as a theoretical

background for developing media literacy (Trninic, 2020). These were the first
eight core concepts that were developed and presented by Barry Duncan and the

Association for Media Literacy (AML):

1. All media are constructions: 2. The media construct reality; 3. Audiences

question the contents/messages in the media; 4. The media have

commercial implications; 5. The media contain ideological messages and

opinions; 6. The media have social and political implications; 7. The form

and content are closely connected to each other in the media; 8. Every

medium has its own aesthetic form. (Wilson and Duncan, 2008, p.129)

Elizabeth Thoman developed her own five core concepts based on these

eight concepts that were mentioned above:

1. All media messages are ‘constructed’; 2. Media messages are constructed

using a creative language with its own rules; 3. Different people

experience the same message differently; 4. The media have embedded

values and point of view; and 5. Most media messages are organized to

gain profit and /or power. (Thoman and Jolls,2004, p.23)

When using the media, sometimes we are the receivers and the other times, we

are the producers. But still, whether you are the receiver or the producer, the

Five Core Concepts of Media Literacy still applies. Tessa Jolls, who joined the

CML as an executive managing director in 1998, concluded the idea that it is

much easier to understand and apply the aforementioned core concepts if they

were presented and dealt with questions instead (Trninic, 2020). The core

questions are:
 1. Who created the media message? 2. What creative techniques are used

for drawing attention? 3. How is it possible for different people to

understand the same message differently? 4. What values, way of life,

and viewpoints are reflected in or left out of the message? 5. Why was the

message sent? (Thoman and Jolls, 2004, p.24)

These Keywords create a brief outline of the analytical construct behind the

concepts and questions:

1. Authorship

2. Format

3. Audience

4. Content

5. Purpose

Table 1. Five Core Concepts of Media Literacy

Key Words Deconstruction: CML’s 5 Core Construction: CML’s 5 Key

CML’s 5 Key Concepts Questions
Questions (Producer)
(Consumer)
1. Authorship Who created this All media What am I authoring?
message? messages are
constructed.
2. Format What creative Media messages Does my message reflect
techniques are are constructed understanding in format,
used to attract my using a creative creativity and technology?
attention? language with its
 own rules.
3. Audience How might Different people Is my message engaging and
different people experience the compelling for my target
understand this same media audience?
message message
differently? differently.
4. Content What values, Media have Have I clearly and consistently
lifestyles and point embedded values framed values, lifesyles and
of view are and points of view. points of view in my content?
represented in or
omitted from this
message?
5. Purpose Why is this Most media Have I communicated my
message being messages are purpose effectively?
sent? organized to gain
profit and /or
power.

Source: CML’s Questions/Tips(Q/tips), Center for Media Literacy(www.medialit.org) in Jolls and

Sund, 2007, p.8 (Trninic, 2020)

2.3 Related Studies

2.3.1 Level of Media Literacy and its Factors

Media literacy is a learned skill for individuals to navigate the media, and

there can be a lot of factors that may affect the level of media literacy of an

individual. In this study, six possible factors that may affect the respondents’ level
of media literacy were taken into consideration. These factors were not just

considered from baseless assumptions. Factors such as gender, grade-level,

media education, social status and level of media usage are a more likely

possible factors of the respondents and the following various studies would

support it.

2.3.1.1 Gender

The relationship between the gender of a person and their level of media

literacy are inconclusive. A study by Metin Yaman from Gazi University where he

studied the level of media literacy and personality traits of Physical Education

and Sports students have shown that when gender variable was taken into

consideration, they (male and female) did not differ significantly and were not

important determiners to their level of media literacy. Instead, it revealed that the

gender of the respondents showed a significant relationship to their personality

traits where their gender variables influenced their personality traits. It also

showed that there is a positive relationship between the personality traits and

their level of media literacy (Yaman, 2020).

The study taken by He Xuan and Wu Xiaomeng on the other hand showed a

different conclusion. It appears that the gender of a person has significant

relationship and a positive correlation to their level of media literacy. In the 534

students, male students tend to be better at technical operations, that is they

explore new technological context in a flexible way. Female students contrarily

showed that they tend to be stronger at moral sense, that is they interact through
ICTs in a responsible way and more aware of their actions (He and Wu, 2015).

This conclusion was supported by another study, where it showed that female

individuals were more likely to consume new media content critically and logically

than their male counterparts (Xizhu, 2021).

2.3.1.2 Media Education

With regard to the effectiveness of media education, different studies showed

a consistent result. A digital media literacy intervention across the United States

and India, although a simple and scalable media literacy intervention, increases

discernment between factual mainstream and false news, helping users more

accurately gauge the credibility of news content they encounter on different

topics and issues (Guess and Lerner et al., 2019).

A similar study conducted in Tehran to investigate the impact of media

literacy education, where the research used a quasi-experimental research

design with a pre-test and post-test control group. The result indicated a

significant difference between the scores of the control group and the

experimental group and further proved that media literacy education has a

significant positive impact on students on their critical thinking skills (Torabi and

Ferdosipour, 2020).

But a research conducted in Netherlands about the impact of media literacy

education on teenagers’ news literacy revealed an interesting result. The

research showed that other factors other than media literacy education, mainly

the level of education, were found to be stronger predictors of the student’s level
of news media literacy than media literacy education itself. It pointed out that at

the lowest level of education, those who did not partake in the media education

program have a high level of news media literacy compared to students following

a media literacy program. The study suggested that motivation may serve as an

explanatory factor in this regard. Although it may sound paradoxical, it is because

those lower educated students that chose to follow specific media literacy

program were less intrinsically motivated to acquire knowledge and instead were

more interested in learning practical skills. Although this research has an

interesting conclusion, its explanation on why students at lower level of education

who did partake on media literacy program have lower media literacy than those

who did not are unsatisfactory (Kleemans et al., 2016).

In Philippines, media education is still being questioned on how the students

will receive it, when it is mandatory for them to take the course especially in the

senior high school level. Media and Information Literacy as a course in senior

high school was still relatively new. But is this program really effective in teaching

its students about its supposed objectives? A report by Yap and Manabat (2018)

explained that during the early days of its implementation, teachers were

unprepared on how to approach the field properly because they themselves, at

least most of them, lack any media education. De La Salle University has always

been an active partner in promoting MIL. Recognizing its advantage in media and

information analysis, it has decided to support this after its implementation as

part of its information literacy campaign. This report by Yap and Manabat was to

provide an overview of a seminar workshop program on MIL with the DLSU

Libraries public school teacher-librarians (they are not librarians but are licensed

professional teachers who were assigned in their respective libraries).

The program was based on a United Nations Educational, Scientific and

Cultural Organization (UNESCO) publications which captured the five modules of

the book entitled ‘Pedagogies of Media and Information Literacies’. For the

researchers to provide a more compelling result, they made use of the

participants’ evaluation for the past two years (2016-207). After these two year

sessions, the program has received a positive feedback with the participants

praising the program for attaining its objectives such as raising awareness of the

importance of media and information literacy being a vital component of lifelong

learning, developing new strategies in teaching media and information literacy

skills and its importance to the young because of the level of knowledge it

imparted. With that being said, the program has definitely attained its objectives

(Yap and Manabat 2018).

Even younger participants and students, who has little experience with media,

this type of media literacy campaign was really effective. In a study conducted by

Muya and Kagaoan recently in 2018 where it aims to assess the media literacy

campaign for Grade 4 pupils, which is relatively younger and inexperienced in the

media environment, after comparing the pretest and posttest scores, their study

found that there was a significant difference in the scores, indicating that the

media literacy campaign was effective for the pupils to understand the role of

media in their lives (Muya and Kagaoan, 2018).

 2.3.1.3 Media Literacy and Social Status

Social Status is the person’s standing within the society based on the level of

income, education and occupation. But due to our respondents being a senior

high school students of the same age group, the researchers would assume that

they have the same level of education, with occupation obviously being out of the

question already. The social status, as being used in this study, refers to the

standing of a person (including his/her family) according to his/her income class.

There are three main social classes in the Philippines, where according to the

Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), 58% of the Filipinos belong to low-income

class, while 40% comprises of middle-income class. Only 1.4% of the population

fall in the high-income class. The current official poverty threshold in the

Philippines is Php10,481, with the low-income class having a monthly income of

(Php10,000-21,000) with below them being considered poor. Second is the

middle-income class having a monthly income of around (Php21,000-126,000).

Third is the upper-income class having a monthly income of (Php126,000-

210,000) with above them being considered as very rich (Zoleta, 2021).

How does the Social Status of a person determine their Media Literacy?

When we are talking about determining the Media Literacy in this section, we are

talking about the Digital Literacy/ICT/New Media Literacy. This can be because

of previous studies already assuming that the Traditional Media are very

accessible, so accessible that even lower income-class people can easily have

access to it. Digital Media’s accessibility on the other hand differs from one social
classes to another. There is a reason why there is a thing called “Digital Divide”,

originally coined by Lloyd Morrisset. “The concept of Digital Divide stems from a

comparative perspective of social and information inequality and depends on the

idea that there are benefits associated with ICT access and usage and negative

consequences attending non-access and usage.” Jan Dijk explained.

In determining what type of social factors correlate with this divide,

socioeconomic status (mainly the income) stands out as a strong influence

(Rinaldi, n.d). A study conducted among a low-income class of students (also

called underserved students) in Atlantic minority serving institution revealed that

we should take this divide more seriously. The result of this study showed that

students attending this kind of institution for first generation minority learners do

not come to college with the technology skills needed for academic success

(Elobaid, 2018).

Another study by Scherer and Siddiq (2019), where they tried to find if there is

a relationship between students’ economic status and ICT literacy using meta-

analysis, shows the same result. The findings of their study suggests that

students’ ICT literacy differs between socioeconomic status groups, thus pointing

to a gap in the domain of ICT.

2.3.1.4 Level of Media Usage

With a bit of context, the level of media in this study usage refers to how often

the respondents use the media, be it a traditional or digital media, while they are

confined in their homes because of pandemic. It has to be noted that when we

say “media usage”, it is when they use media for gathering relevant information

during the time of pandemic crisis. Different studies are always consistent in

finding the positive relation between the level of media usage and the media

literacy of a person.

A study by Indira Giraud (2005), where she took a research about how people

become media literate and their media habit, she grouped her sample

populations into three. In her conclusion, the first group consisting of strong

media literate people showed that they are frequent users of media. The third

group (low media literate people) on the other hand were far behind from the first

and second group (moderate media literate people) in terms of frequency of

media use, and which is why from the survey they were categorized into low

media literate people. Her research also found that those people who had been

through media education and continue to do so had a strong tendency to use the

media frequently. The next significant and interesting findings of her study was

that the first group (strong media literate people) and second group (moderate

media literate) are both highly critical thinkers compared to the third group (low

media literate people). This is because the first and second group use a lot more

diverse media and had a high level of use in each media. Meaning that they are

resourceful in finding relevant information (Giraud, 2005).

A similar and more recent study by Shin and Zanuddin (2019) showed similar

results. The study also divided the subjects into three groups, but in this study it

is based on their level of media use (Group 1: Low; Group 2: Medium; Group 3:
High). The study finds that the media literacy for Group 1 and 2 has no significant

difference. But both group has a significant difference to Group 3 which

supported the study’s hypothesis that the level of media use indeed has an

impact on media literacy of a person (Shin and Zanuddin, 2019).

The studies mentioned above are just about the relationship between level of

usage on media (generally) and level of media literacy. The study that the

researchers are about to conduct are very specific, in that the respondents will be

asked which type of media they use the most amidst the pandemic, which is

between the Traditional and Digital media. This can be done through their usage

assessment on two Traditional media (Televisions, Print Media) and three Digital

Media (Social Media, Websites and Blogs, Text Messaging and Calls). Through

this way, the researchers will know if there is a significant relationship between

what types of media they use the most and their level of media literacy.

2.3.2 Media Literacy amidst the COVID-19 Pandemic Crisis

In a significant social, economic, political events and crisis, including

epidemics and pandemics, media plays a crucial role in information

dissemination. During such crisis, there is a surge in information seeking

especially credible and authentic information. This phenomenon where people’s

dependency on the media increased with the rise in social conflicts, resulting in

greater chances of the media’s potential effects was explained by the Media

Dependency Theory, proposed by Sandra Ball-Rokeach and Melvin Defleur

(Rajasekhar et al, 2021). This influx of information seeking creates an information

overload. Media is known to spread awareness and disease mitigation efforts

during epidemics. But in the digital age, misinformation and rumors tend to be

detrimental to such mitigation efforts (Xiao et al., 2015). That is why the COVID-

19 pandemic has fully revealed the significance of media literacy. People with

little knowledge on how the media landscape operate are not helping, adding a

problem to an already arduous situation.

Various researchers have looked on and tracked the manner of usage and

evaluation of media information of people during the COVID-19 pandemic. A

study that took place in Bosnia and Herzegovina where it investigated the usage

and information evaluation about COVID-19, including the level of trust in

sources of information, and whether they have been confused by the amount of

information showed a concerning result. This study by Trininic (2020) was

discussed within the context of five core concepts of media literacy. This concept

offers five questions that could be used in the process of deconstruction of any

piece of information. These questions were posed to the respondents in order to

determine their media competency. The result of the study showed that the

study’s respondents mostly turned to online media portals such as social media

for credible information and uses it several times a week that they were often

confused by the amount of information. Only a one-third of the respondents

double-checked information which is concerning given the amount of false

information circulating during the pandemic. Most of them would not share an

information whose validity they found to be difficult to establish which is quite

ironic since most of them cannot and do not double check the credibility of the
information that they receive in the first place. In terms of the agents they trust

the most for COVID-19 related information, the respondents appraise the medical

doctors and medical institutions. Still, they have a low-level of ability to recognize

offensive content, with almost half of the respondents being ignorant about the

content violating the right to privacy (Trininic, 2020).

In another study where it gives an emphasis on fake news consumption and

media literacy, specifically on the social media, during COVID-19 lockdown

(April, 2020) also showed a concerning result. The researcher argued that during

the COVID-19 pandemic crisis, people tend to not pay attention to the quality of

information they consume online. Because of the constant and abundant

information that goes to their news feeds, they give little to no time analyzing

them. As a matter of fact, more than half of the study’s respondents were unable

to determine whether the information they got from social media about COVID-19

related information is fake news. While they don’t know the credibility of

information they get from social media, the respondents argued that social media

contents help them to take more precautions about COVID-19. When asked if

they used to share information about COVID-19, majority willingly said “yes”

which is concerning given that majority of them also can’t determine if an

information is fake or not (Ouedraogo, 2020). This is similar to the conclusion of

the research by Larysa Shevchenko et al. according to their research, modern

recipients usually do not check information obtained from media sources

especially medical related information. They associate the low media literacy with
the rapid globalization and the skills of journalists to create a sensationalized

news with a bright headline (Shevchenko, 2021).

A local study conducted in Iloilo, Philippines by Daryl Superio et al. during the

first months of the pandemic where it investigated the information-seeking

behavior of the college students in the said province. Filipinos especially college

students are an avid users of media, especially social media like Facebook.

Theoretically, college students should have an at least big knowledge about what

is media literacy. In this research, the study showed that the preferred primary

sources of information and perceived to be the most believable sources are the

mass media. When presented with information about COVID-19 where some are

facts and some are fake, majority have shown to have a high level of knowledge

about the pandemic. However, a considerable proportion of the respondents has

believed in COVID-19 myths, where some has even believed conspiracy

theories. Health myths are misinformation that can lead to people to take

extreme precautionary measures that could endanger their health (Superio et al.,

2021).

2.4 Synthesis

Understanding what media is, its effects on us, its influence on our lives

and how we see the world is one of the main reason why media literacy is very
important and should not be ignored. As a nation who values and promotes

democracy, a media literate people are needed to ensure the health of our

democracy. With the free flow of information with little regulations, the inevitable

spread of various forms of false information, of which has caused the information

crisis, has been a detrimental problem in our society. People have been misled,

fooled, and brainwashed which is dangerous considering its effects on our

mental health that causes irrational fears, hatred, bigotry, anxiety, and loss of

trust. One way to combat this plague of false information is to advocate on giving

importance to media education to produce a large number of media literate

people, and hopefully create a society that is not easily persuaded and are

critical thinkers.

(Chapter 3)
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, it discusses the methods and instruments used to collect the

necessary data for the research problem, and how those data will be analyzed

and interpreted to provide a good conclusion. Additionally, it also discusses the

research design, research locale, and research participants including the

sampling design used.

3.1 Research Design

This research was a quantitative research designed as descriptive-

correlational research. Benjamin Noah (2021) described descriptive-correlational

research as understanding a phenomenon and its properties, where the data is

often gathered through survey and observational tools and mainly asks the

question “what?” (Gall and Borg,2007). It also examines the relationship between

two (or more) variables, given that the variables aren’t manipulated or controlled.

This study was a descriptive-correlational research because it tries to

determine if there is any relationship between the profile of the respondents and

their level of media usage to their level of media literacy. Although the level of

media literacy of the respondents can be evaluated based on the five core

concepts of media literacy, by determining its relationship between the factors

that could possibly influence it is needed to draw a well-grounded conclusion.

3.2 Research Locale

 This research was to be conducted in Ibn Siena Integrated School

Foundation, a school located in Biyaba Damag, Marawi City,a city in the province

of Lanao del Sur of southern Philippines. It is a school famously known in the

said city because of its integration of Islamic and Western educational

curriculum, which had attracted the predominantly Muslim and ethnic Meranao

population of the city. It follows the K-12 curriculum, where it offers three strands

in the Senior High School level. They are the Science, Technology, Engineering

and Mathematics (STEM), Accountancy, Business and Management (ABM), and

Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMSS).

3.3 Research Participants and Sampling Design

The Senior High School students of Ibn Siena Integrated School

Foundation were the participants of this study. The Senior High School level was

divided into two different grade levels (Grade 11 and Grade 12) and was further

divided based on strands and sections. In the school year of 2021-2022, which is

when this research was conducted, the number of students in the Senior High

School department has a total of 578 students, where 322 of these students

belong to the 11th Grade and the rest (256 students) belong to the 12 th Grade.

In gathering and choosing the participants of this study, the researchers

used the stratified sampling method. This is because it gives a smaller error in

estimation and is more precise in making generalizations since the participants

from the sample size would be divided based on similar characteristics to form

the different strata. The participants were then chosen based on these strata
randomly with the sample size of each stratum being proportionately picked to

act as a representation of that group. The sample size of this study was

calculated using the Slovin’s Formula with a confidence level of 90%. Using this

formula, 85 respondents are taken from the 578 total population, where it acts as

the representation of the whole. The sample size is then grouped in strata based

on the respondent’s grade level. To get a proportionate amount of representation

from each strata, the proportionate stratified random sample will be obtained

using this formula: (sample size/population size) x stratum size.

Table 2.1 Sample Size from the Slovin’s Formula

Formula: n= N/ (1+N(e)^2)

Where: N= population size, n= sample size, e= margin of error, 1= constant

n= 578/ (1+578(0.05) ^2)

n= 236

Table 2.2 Proportionate Distribution of Samples per Stratum

Senior High Population Percentage of Desired Number

School Grade Population (%) of Respondents

Level

(Strata)

Grade 11 322 55.7% 131

 Grade 12 256 44.3% 105

TOTAL 578 100% 236

3.4 Data Collection Method and Research Instrument

To collect the necessary data for the research problem, the researchers

used a survey-questionnaire. The survey was distributed through the help of

Google Form, which requires the respondents to have an Internet connection to

be able to participate in the survey. Before the participants could answer the

survey, they were asked if they were willing to participate in the study, which is

required to proceed to the questionnaire and serves as an evidence that they

participated in the survey voluntarily. Before they could proceed, they were also

assured that whatever they put in the survey are confidential.

In the survey-questionnaire, the usual close-ended questions were used,

which provide respondents with a fixed number of responses from which to

choose from (Lavrakas, P., 2008). But in this survey, it does not use the typical

(yes/no) or (agree/disagree) type of responses. Instead, the responses are more

detailed and explanatory. The responses on each question that the respondents

could choose from also differs from one another, which makes it very flexible and

versatile. The survey questionnaire was formalized (standardized) with precisely

defined questions and modalities of answers offered. Almost all the questions
required a single answer while only one question offered the option of multiple

answers.

The survey questionnaire was categorized into three; the respondents’ profile,

their manner usage amidst the pandemic, and their manner of usage and

evaluation of information on media.

The Manner of Usage and Evaluation of Information on Media category

were further categorized into five based on the five core concepts of media

literacy. Questions that would be asked were mostly related to COVID-19

pandemic, where each core concepts were given four questions for a total of

twenty questions. Their answers would provide insights to the researchers and

can be looked at from various angles to give a sound and good interpretation.

3.5 Data Analysis

The data collected from the survey questionnaires would be transferred to

an electronic device. In analyzing these collected data, the researchers would

use the SPSS software. SPSS is an analytical software that can be used to

assist the analysis of quantitative data, it stands for Statistical Package for the

Social Science. In addition, to analyze and interpret the data, the researchers

would use percentage computation procedures and weighted mean. To find out if

the main variables have any relationships, specifically the independent variables

and the dependent variable, the researchers would utilize the Chi-square

statistics to compare the observed results and expected results.

 (CHAPTER 4)

DATA PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION AND ANALYSIS

This chapter would discuss the results of the conducted survey.

Specifically, it would present the data gathered from the respondents’ profile,

their media usage amidst the pandemic, and most importantly, their manner of

usage and evaluation of information on media. From these data, the researchers

would analyze the data and then give an extensive interpretation. It is from this

interpretation of data where the evaluation of their level of media literacy would

be measured based on the five core concepts of media literacy.

4.1 Profile of the Respondents

The table below shows the respondents’ profile in terms of gender, grade

level, and their social status.

Gender Frequency Percentage (%)

Male 42 49.4%
Female 43 51.5%
TOTAL 85 100%
Table 4.1 Gender of the Respondents

From the table above, it shows that from the 85 respondents of the study,

there are 42 male respondents who participated in the study which comprises

49.4% of the total respondents, and 43 female respondents who participated in

the study which comprises 50.6% of the total respondents.

 Table 4.2 Distribution of the Respondents by Grade Level

Grade Level Frequencies Percentage (%)

Grade 11 48 56.5%
Grade 12 37 43.5%
TOTAL 85 100%

From the table above, it shows the grade level of which the respondents

belonged to. The distribution of respondents in terms of grade level was based

on the earlier stratified sampling method, which is why there are 48 Grade 11

students of the 85 respondents which comprises 56.5% of the total respondents,

and 37 Grade 12 students of the 85 respondents which comprises 43.5% of the

total respondents. This is because there are more Grade 11 students than Grade

12 students in Ibn Siena Integrated School Foundation where the study was

conducted.

Table 4.3 Social Status of the Respondents

Social Status Frequency Percentage (%)

Low-Income Class
28 33%
(<P10,000-P21,000)
Middle-Income Class
38 44.7%
(P21,000-P126,000)
High-Income Class
19 22.3%
(P126,000-P210,000>)
TOTAL 85 100%
 From the table above, majority of the respondents belong to the Middle-

Income Class where they comprise 44.7% of the total respondents, which are 38

Middle-Income Class respondents out of 85 respondents. Second to that are the

Low-Income Class where they comprise 33% of the total respondents, which are

28 Low-Income Class respondents out of 85 respondents. For the High-Income

Class, there are 19 out of 85 respondents which belong to this class which

comprises 22.3% of the total respondents. In total, there are more respondents

who belong above the Low-Income Class, which can be explained by the fact

that Ibn Siena Integrated School Foundation is a private school where its

students are more likely to have a stable socioeconomic status.

4.2 Media Usage Assessment Amidst the Pandemic

The figures below show the level of media usage on each media (both

Traditional and Digital Media) amidst the pandemic:

Level of Usage on each

53
Media
52
48

37 36

28
24 25
20
17 16 17
15
13
8
6
4 3 3
Television Print Media 0 Social Media Websites and Blogs Text Messaging and
Calls

Never Sometimes Often Always

Figure 4.1

Table 4.4

Never Sometimes Often Always

Media f % F % F % f %
Television 17 20% 48 56.5% 16 18.8% 4 4.7%
Print Media 13 15.3% 52 61.2% 17 20% 3 3.5%
Social Media 0 0% 8 9.4% 24 28.2% 53 62.4%
Websites
3 3.53% 37 43.53% 25 29.41% 20 23.53%
and Blogs
Text
Messaging 6 7% 36 42.4% 28 33% 15 17.6%
and Calls
Table 4.4
 The figures above confirm the trends among the adolescents on what

media they use the most nowadays. This was also expected since the survey

was conducted through Google Form which requires Internet for the respondents

to partake in. The figures above reveal that majority of the respondents (53 out of

85 respondents) highly uses Social Media to gather information amidst the

pandemic, which makes up 62.4% of the total respondents. Next to the highly

used media are the Websites and Blogs which makes up 23.53% of the total

respondents and Text Messaging and Calls which makes up 17.6% of the total

respondents. Again, these three media (Social Media, Websites and Blogs, Text

Messaging and Calls) are among the frequently used media, where Social Media

are frequently used by 28.2% of the total respondents, Websites and Blogs are

frequently used by 29.41% of the total respondents, and finally, Text Messaging

and Calls are frequently used by 33% of the total respondents. Among the

occasionally used media is where Television and Print Media sits in, where

Television are occasionally used by 56.5% of the total respondents and Print

Media by 61.2% of the total respondents. A significant number of respondents

also occasionally uses Websites and Blogs (43.43%) and Text Messaging and

Calls (42.4%). Finally, for the “never” and least used media, Television, Print

Media and Text Messaging and Calls have a small percent of the respondents

who never used these kinds of media.

 Given these sets of data, it can be concluded that Digital Media are the

preferred means of gathering information amidst the pandemic by the

respondents where they have a high level of usage, especially the Social Media,

and the Traditional Media like Television and Print Media are in sharp decline

where majority of the respondents only uses them occasionally. This was

supported by a lot of studies like that of Twenge et al. (2020), where their study

shows the increasing trends of Digital Media among the 12 th Graders and the

decline of Traditional Media.

4.3 Manner of Usage and Evaluation of Information on Media

The figures below show the manner of usage and evaluation of

information on media by the respondents. This is divided into five categories

which are based on the 5 core concepts of Media Literacy.

A. Authorship
 Level of Trust to the Various Sources of In-
formation on COVID-19
Internet Influencer 8

Government Public Health Institution 39

Favorite Celebrities 5

Scientists, Medical Doctors, and Health Experts 65

Local Politicians 11

Professional Journalists 37

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Level of trust in sources of information on COVID-19

Figure 4.2

Question 1. Which interpersonal sources on COVID-

f %
19 do you trust? (Multiple answers are an option)
Professional Journalists 37 43.5%
Local Politicians 11 12.9%
Scientists, Medical Doctors, and Health Experts 66 77.6%
Favorite Celebrities 4 4.7%
Government Public Health Institutions 39 45.8%
Internet Influencers 8 9.4%
Table 4.5 Question 1

The result shows that the respondents have a high level of ability to

choose a relevant source of information on COVID-19. From the given choices,

Scientists, Medical Doctors, and Health Experts are the most trusted sources of

Information on COVID-19. Meanwhile, Government Public Health Officials scored

a little higher than the Professional Journalists where the former takes up the

second place and the latter in the third place. These three interpersonal sources

of information on COVID-19 have a substantial number of scores with respect to

Local Politicians, Favorite Celebrities and Internet Influencers, which could only

mean that they are far more preferred as a sources of information on COVID-19.

Double-Checking the Information

2, 2.3%
8, 9.4%

28; 33% Mostly, yes

Sometimes, when I can't see

any reference to the source

Seldom

No, never

47, 55.3%

Figure 4.3

2. Do you double-check any relevant information to

f %
pandemic?
Mostly, yes 28 33%
Sometimes, when I can’t see any reference to the source 47 55%
Seldom 8 9%
No, never 2 2%
Table 4.6 Question 2
 The result shows that a third of the respondents have often double-

checked information that are relevant to pandemic. This result is hardly satisfying

for various reasons. One of it is that although a third of the respondents do often

double-check their information, the rest double-checks their information

sometimes, seldom, or never, especially when one considers the amount of fake

news that is circulating amidst the pandemic, and the media that the respondents

preferred in gathering information which are the Digital Media where

misinformation spreads like a wildfire. It is found that misinformation and

disinformation in the Philippines often spread unchecked in messaging apps-

particularly Messenger- because these are private spaces that are harder to fact-

check, according to a report in February 2021 by Rappler.

 Criteria for the Credibility of Information
8, 9.4%

33, 38.8% The source is cited

I trust a particula media company
22, 25.9% Several other media companies re-
leased the same information
Viral/It has many views

22, 25.9%

Figure 4.4

Table 4.7 Question 3

3. How would you know if a piece of information is

f %
credible
The source is cited 33 38.8%
I trust a particular media company 22 25.9%
Several other media companies released the same information 22 25.9%
Viral/ It has many views 8 9.4%

In most cases, 38.8% of the respondents claim that they know that a piece

of information is credible since there is a trustworthy source cited, then

respondents who trust an information based on the fact that several other media

companies released the same information (25.9%) which scored the same as the

respondents who trust a particular media company (25.9%), to be followed by

those who only look on the number of views (9.4%). This high level of trust to an

information released by a particular media company or information released by

several media companies is not surprising though because as already illustrated

in Figure X, a large portion of respondents have a high level of trust to

Professional Journalists, especially when it comes to COVID-19 related

information.

Based on these data, one can conclude that more than half of the

respondents use reliable parameters for evaluating information credibility. It is

because they cross-check their information either by checking the sources of that

information or by checking if several media companies also released the same

information. Other than that, there is still a high percentage of respondents who

does not fact-check their information because they trust a particular media

company where they get all their information from, and the other 9.4% who resort

to the high number of views (also known as viral) as a credibility parameter.

 Frequency of checking the Author/Maker of a
Media Message
6; 7%
16, 18.8%
10, 11.8%
Most of the time, yes
Sometimes, if it's a big news
Seldom
I don't really think about it

53, 62.4%

Figure 4.5

4. When reading a relevant information, do you really

care/check who were the authors/ makers of that media f %
message?
Most of the time, yes 16 18.8%
Sometimes, if it’s a big news 53 62.4%
Seldom 10 11.8%
I don’t really think about it 6 7%
Table 4.8 Question 4

From the Figures above, when the respondents were asked how

frequently do they really care/check who were the authors of a media message,

majority of them (62.4%) answered that they only care when the news was big
and significant, while only 18.8% are being consistent, 11.8% seldom, and 7%

who never really think about checking the authors of an information. This goes to

show that the respondents are only highly attentive on who were the authors of a

particular information on what they see as big, trending, or controversial. This

has both its upsides and downsides. One of the upsides is that, because they

only care about the big news, they don’t have to constantly worry about others

which are less significant, which are most of the time useless information

anyways. The downside of it is that they can be a target of news sources with

overstated claims.

To conclude the Authorship section, most respondents have good

parameters in checking the trustworthiness of a particular information, which are

either by checking the cited sources or checking if other media companies

released the same information. Regarding the type of personnel that they trust on

a certain situation which is in this case the pandemic caused by COVID-19, the

respondents have a high level of ability to choose relevant sources of

information. As for the frequency of double-checking these types of information,

the respondents would only verify them occasionally. For the general information

out there, the respondents only care on who were the authors of a media

message on what they think as trending or big news.

B. FORMAT
 News Headlines that got the
Respondents' attention
19, 22.3%

27, 31.8% A Chinese Virus emerged from the

east
COVID-19 was a hoax
A COVID-19 vaccine was invented
Is COVID-19 used to control the
people?

14, 16.5%

25, 29.4%

Figure 4.6

5. Which of these news headlines would catch your

f %
attention the most?
A Chinese Virus emerged from the east 19 22.3%
COVID-19 was a hoax 14 16.5%
A COVID-19 vaccine was invented 25 29.4%
Is COVID-19 used to control the people? 27 31.8%
Table 4.9 Question 5

Earlier, we have learned that the respondents give much more value to

what they think as “big news”. That is why when presented with various news

headlines, majority of them (70.6%) find it more compulsive to read a provocative

news headlines written in a conspiracy theory like manner than a news headline
that is more relevant to this pandemic. This result just proves how powerful news

headlines are and what they are capable of, especially spreading disinformation

to the masses. With that being said, the respondents are very vulnerable to

sensationalized news with a flashy headlines and ridiculous stories.

Willingness to read the Whole Article

6; 7% 10, 11.8%

Mostly, yes
Sometimes
Only if I'm really interested
No, headlines were enough for me

36,
42.4%
33,
38.8%

Figure 4.7

6.When passing through a news headline, do you

f %
read the whole article?
Mostly, yes 10 11.8%
Sometimes 33 38.8%
Only if I’m really interested 36 42.4%
No, headlines were enough for me 6 7%
Table 4.10 Question 6
 It is said that news headlines are just the tip of an iceberg because there’s

always more to a story than what they are trying to portray. Choosing to only

read the headline will make you miss out on important details that may be critical

to understanding the topic (Lariat, 2020). The result shows that more

respondents would only read the whole article of a news headline on what they

find as interesting (36%), next to that are respondents who would only read the

whole article occasionally (38.8%), then respondents who frequently read the

whole article (11.8%), and then 7% of the respondents saying that headlines

were sufficient for them.

Analyzing this result with the previous one, it can be said that what the

respondents mean by headlines that they find as interesting are those

provocative ones. This is a display of gullibility on the respondents’ part which is

quite alarming, considering that they have the tendency to believe this piece of

information, not to mention that it is misleading most of the time. That is why

most media literacy advocates recommended to always read the entirety of an

article and read from more sources than just one before forming views on a

specific event or story.

 How frequent the Respondents' fall into
Clickbaits
13, 15.3% 11; 13%

Yes, I've fallen a lot of times

I've fallen a few times
No, I've never fallen for such trick

61, 71.7%%

Figure 4.8

7. Have you ever fallen into an exaggerated or

f %
misleading headline popularly known as clickbait?
Yes, I’ve fallen a lot of times 11 13%
I’ve fallen a few times 61 71.7%
No, I’ve never fallen for such trick 13 15.3%
Table 4.11 Question 7

Based on what is shown on Figure X and X, it is unsurprising and

predictable how majority of the respondents (71.7%) have fallen at least a few

times to a clickbait with 13% of the respondents who have fallen to this trick a lot

of times. When an internet content uses clickbait, it can be because they value
getting more views over producing quality contents or information. Clickbait can

be harmful when it’s used along with the creation of fake news, and the thing is

that there is a possibility that viewers might fall to this trap unknowingly. Which is

why the result can be interpreted into two. It is either the respondents’ have the

capability to spot a clickbait and be able to realize when they have fallen to such

trap, or the respondents cannot recognize a clickbait easily where they could

have fallen to such trap unknowingly.

If the former is the case, then the respondents can spot a clickbait.

Whether they have fallen to it a few times or a lot of times, it is good that they

were able to realize whey they have fallen to a clickbait. It also indicates that the

result from Figure X is reliable. If the latter is the case, then this makes the result

ambiguous because they may have fallen to the trap unknowingly which means

that the number of times they have fallen into a clickbait was much more. It is

also possible these two conditions both played out in the conclusion of this result.
 Awareness on the Creative Language
Techniques
14, 16.4%

26, 30.6%
Yes, I can easily spot it
I can spot it sometimes
I can't really tell

45; 53%

Figure 4.9

8. Can you spot/ are you aware on the creative

language techniques that were used to attract your
F %
attention? Such as using catchy headlines, large
photographs, and disturbing images?
Yes, I can easily spot it 26 30.6%
I can spot it sometimes 45 53%
I can’t really tell 14 16.4%
Table 4.12 Question 8

It seems like the respondents, most of them, are aware on the creative

language techniques that were used to attract their attention, where 53% saying

that they can spot it sometimes and 30.6% claiming that they can easily spot it.
Referring to the previous discussion, since most of the respondents are aware

and have the capability to spot such techniques, then it is more likely that they

are also aware when they have fallen to such traps. Moreover, the respondents’

assessment on how many times they have fallen to a clickbait are more likely to

be reliable too.

Judging from their performance on the Format section, most respondents

are aware on the creative language techniques that were used to garner a lot of

attention and views. But even though they claim to be aware, most of them still

have fallen to a clickbait a few times. This is demonstrated on the Figure X,

where provocative news headlines got their attention the most. They are also

more likely to read the whole article of these news headlines since most of them

are willing to read the whole article if they find it interesting. Whether they’ll

believe the content or not, it is out of the question, and we are about to know.

C. AUDIENCE
 Open-mindedness of the Respondents
5, 5.9%

Yes, I'm open-minded

Sometimes, if they have a reason for
it
No, if they were wrong from my
perspective
34; 40%
46,
54.1%

Figure 4.10

9. Do you consider the perspectives, opinions, and

F %
points of view of other people?
Yes, I’m open-minded 46 54.1%
Sometimes, if they have a reason for it 34 40%
No, if they were wrong from my perspective 5 5.9%
Table 4.13

More than half of the respondents claim that they are open-minded

(54.1%), while a considerable number of respondents (40%) would only consider

other perspectives and opinions, given that they were reasonable. There is,

however, a small number of respondents (5.9%) who are close-minded. This

result suggests that most of the respondents are good viewers and consumers of

information because they set their bias and pre-existing beliefs aside, and are

welcoming of different ideas, although some of the respondents would only do so

they if they were reasonable enough which is understandable. One of the

characteristics of a media literate person is that he/she is open-minded. In an

article written by Rebecca (2021), where she enumerated 20 insightful benefits of

being open-minded, one of the benefits is that a person will not be so easily

manipulated. According to her, the more a person opens his/her mind and heart

to things outside his/her realm of understanding, the less manipulated and

swayed a person will be by the media.

Audience Consideration
6; 7%

19; 22% Yes, I'm careful and aware

No, I don't consider it most of the
time
I don't really think about it

60; 71%

Figure 4.11
 10. When sharing an information, do you consider that
f %
different people might perceive it differently?
Yes, I’m careful and aware 60 70.6%
No, I don’t consider it most of the time 19 22.4%
I don’t really think about it 6 7%
Table 4.14 Question 10

Previously, the respondents claimed that they are open to different ideas.

If that is truly the case, then it explains why majority of them (70.6%) would

consider their audience first before sharing an information. But there is a small

percentage of the respondents who don’t consider it most of the time (22.4%)

and respondents who don’t really think about it (7%). Still, most of the

respondents have fulfilled the third core concept of media literacy, which states

that different people experience the same media message differently.

 Ability to identify Hate Speech

23; 27%
26, 30.6%

Yes, on several occasions

A few times
I can't really tell

36, 42.4%

Figure 4.12

11. Have you noticed any COVID-19 related

information that might be offensive in terms of race, f %
nation, jobs, or religious beliefs?
Yes, on several occasions 26 30.6%
A few times 36 42.4%
I can’t really tell 23 27%
Table 4.15 Question 11

Figure X demonstrates that a total of 73% of the respondents have had an

experience on offensive content during the pandemic, which is from the 30.6%

who recognized it on several occasion and a 42.4% who recognized it only a few

times. There is, however, a significant number of respondents (27%) who were
not able to tell the difference. At the same times, the United Nations Secretary-

General Antonio Guterres said that “the pandemic continues to unleash a

tsunami of hate and xenophobia, scapegoating and scare-mongering” and urged

governments to “act now to strengthen the immunity of our societies against the

virus of hate.” Most of the these hate speech propagated amidst the pandemic

often target Chinese or of East Asian descent. Many have also latched onto the

COVID-19 crisis to advance anti-immigrant, white supremacist, ultra-nationalist,

antisemitic, and xenophobic conspiracy theories that demonizes refugees,

foreigners, prominent individuals, and political leaders. With this surge of hate

speech that permeated amidst the pandemic, a media literate person should be

able to recognize them. Fortunately, more respondents were able to recognize

such offensive content claiming that they have seen it on several occasions,

while others a few times.

 Confirmation Bias Tendency
9, 10.6% 9, 10.6%

Yes, always
Only if it's proven to be true
Not necessarily

67, 78.8%

Figure 4.13

12. Would you believe a piece of information if it

conforms to your political beliefs, values, and ways of f %
life?
Yes, always 9 10.6%
Only if it’s proven to be true 67 78.8%
Not necessarily 9 10.6%
Table 4.16 Question 12

We already talked about how the respondents are open to new ideas and

perspectives. But this one is different because it talks about the instilled pre-

existing beliefs of the respondents and how it affects their evaluation information,

especially those information that align to their beliefs and views. If most of the
respondents are open-minded, then it is only reasonable why majority of them

claim that their pre-existing beliefs do not influence their information seeking

behavior. There is a catch though, most (78.8%) would still believe it given that

it’s proven to be true which kind of makes sense. 10.6% of the respondents claim

that they are not necessarily inclined to believe these types of information, which

is good, while the other 10.6% shows a concerning etiquette. A media literate

person should be able to control his/her bias, especially when gathering

information. Lack of ability to do so can make a person susceptible to

manipulation and disinformation.

To summarize their performance on the Audience section, the

respondents overall have shown a good performance regarding the third core

concepts of media literacy. They displayed open-mindedness to different ideas,

opinions, perspectives, and point of views. Even when bombarded with

information that shares the same view as them, they try to view it as objectively

as possible by setting heir own biases aside. They are also considerate to their

audience when sharing an information by considering that they might view it

differently. They also have the capability to spot offensive contents which is an

essential skill required as an open-minded people like they claim to be.

D. CONTENT

Sharing an Information that lacks Credibility

11; 13%

26, 30.6%

Yes, many of them

Sometimes, when I'm not fully
aware
Never shared such kind of infor-
mation

48, 56.4%

Figure 4.14

Table 4.17 Question 13

13. Have you ever shared a COVID-19 related

information that you were not sure of in its credibility?
f %
Information such as COVID-19 vaccines being deadly
and vaccination site (arm) becoming magnetic?
Yes, many of them 11 13%
Sometimes, when I’m not fully aware 48 56.4%
Never shared such kind of information 26 30.6%
 It’s good that the respondents do consider their audience before sharing

an information but understanding what kinds of information they share and

whether they could differentiate a credible information to a fake information is just

as crucial as a responsible sharer of information. Unfortunately, 56.4% of the

respondents have had shared information that they were not sure of in its

credibility occasionally, with 13% s saying that they had shared many of them.

This result is deeply concerning, and it indicates the recklessness of the

respondents when sharing an information in the media landscape, particularly in

Social Media, their preferred medium, where these types of information were

being shared by multitude of people and spread like a wildfire. With that being

said, there is 30.6% of the respondents who claim to have not shared suck kind

of information which is worthy to mention as well.

 Encountering a Fake News regarding
COVID-19
4, 4.7%

Yes, I saw many of them

I can't really tell
28; 33% No, I haven't

53, 62.3%

Figure 4.15

14. Have you encountered a fake news or

f %
disinformation regarding COVID-19?
Yes, I saw many of them 53 62.3%
I can’t really tell 28 33%
No, I haven’t 4 4.7%
Table 4.18 Question 14

With regard to their ability to spot a fake information, the result shows that

most of the respondent (62.3%) have a high ability to spot fake news or

disinformation because they claim to have seen many of them during the

pandemic. Other than that, 33% of them can’t tell the difference if an information
is fake, while 4.7% saying that they have never any of it. With the amount of fake

news that is circulating amidst the pandemic, especially those related to COVID-

19, a media literate person should be able to recognize many of them.

Ability to spot Biases

13, 15.3%

23; 27%

Yes, it is obvious
Sometimes
No, I can't tell the difference

49, 57.7%

Figure 4.16

15. Can you tell if a piece of information has certain

biases, like promoting a certain point of views, values, f %
and ideologies?
Yes, it is obvious 23 27%
Sometimes 49 57.7%
No, I can’t tell the difference 13 15.3%
Table 4.19 Question 15
 Identifying a bias information can be tricky because it presents itself as a

fact, while it is heavily opinionated. In order to avoid being persuaded by such

content, a person should be able to recognize them. The result shows that most

of the respondents (57.7%) have a hard time recognizing a piece of information

with certain biases, stating that they could only recognize it “sometimes”, while a

small percentage (15.3%) can’t completely differentiate if a piece of information

has certain biases. Only 27% of the respondents claim that they can easily tell

and recognize a bias information.

Attitudes when encountering a Misleading

Information

24; 28%
30; 35% I try to learn the complete image of
the story
I warn people from believing and
sharing such information
I just skip and avoid

31; 36%

Figure 4.17
 16, When encountering a suspicious, misleading, or
inciting piece of information, what do you do most of f %
the time?
I try to learn the complete image of the story 24 28.2%
I warn people from believing and sharing such information 31 36.5%
I just skip and avoid 30 35.3%
Table 4.20 Question 16

According to the respondents, when they encounter a misleading

information, 36.5% of them tries to warn others from falling into it, 35.3% who just

skips and tries to avoid it, then 28.2% who tries to understand the whole context.

These three choices are acceptable, but it is recommended for a media literate

person when encountering a misleading information to always look for the truth

by getting the whole context, especially during this crisis where misinformation

was everywhere. A media literate person should also help others not to fall for

misinformation, this helps to at least mitigate its spread. While a third of the

respondents just skips and avoids it, though not the best action, it is still

understandable.

Before I conclude the Content section, it is necessary to understand the

difference between fake news and bias. Fake news differs from bias in that fake

news is specifically untrue. While Biased sources or information don’t necessarily

use lies, they just present one side of the story while excluding others, which is

by presenting the facts that support their viewpoint. This gives an incomplete and
therefore inaccurate picture (Davis, 1990). That is why it is said that bias

information is much trickier to recognize because it presents itself as fact while

only presenting half of the story.

Going back to the data, it is no wonder why most of the respondents claim

to have the ability to recognize fake news easily, while having a hard time

recognizing a biased information saying that they could only recognize it

“sometimes”. When encountering such contents, the respondents are divided into

three. A third of the respondents try to warn others from falling into such

contents, another third saying that they just skip and avoid it, then finally, a third

who tries to learn the whole story by learning the context. But when asked if they

have ever shared an information where they weren’t sure of in its credibility, it

reveals that most of the respondents are reckless sharers of information, which

can be explained by the fact that they only double-check their information

“sometimes”.
 Awareness on how Media can shape
your View
1, 1.1%

22, 25.6%
Yes, I'm aware
I didn't think that it can
No, I just don't know

62; 73%

Figure 4.18

17. Are you aware that what is shown in the media

f %
can change how you see and interpret the world?
Yes, I’m aware 62 73%
I didn’t think that it can 22 25.9%
No, I just don’t know 1 1.1%
Table 4.21 Question 17

We discussed earlier how many respondents claim that try their best to

view a media message as objective as possible. This gives us a clue that most of

the respondents are aware how powerful a media can be in shaping a person’s

view. This can be affirmed by the given result, where 73% of the respondents
claim to be aware of the media’s influence. There is, however, a 25.9% of the

respondents who didn’t think that it can, while 1.1% who genuinely don’t know.

Awareness on the power of media is the first step a person should learn before

they engage in it.

Encountering Dangerous Products

12, 14.1%

29, 34.1%
Yes, I saw many of them
I rarely saw any
Never seen any of it

44, 51.8%

Figure 4.19

18. Have you encountered sketchy and dangerous

f %
products being advertised and sold in the pandemic?
Yes, I saw many of them 29 34.1%
I rarely saw any 44 51.8%
Never seen any of it 12 14.1%
Table 4.22 Question 18
 Just as there are many disinformation amidst the pandemic, many took

advantage of this crisis because of the high demand for personal protection and

hygiene products (Interpol). In the Philippines, the Bureau of Customs (BOC) has

seized P30 million worth of counterfeit medicines such as Biogesic, Neozep,

Bioflu, Planax, and other popular medicines (customs.gov.ph). With this sheer

number of dangerous products being sold and advertised in the pandemic, an

active media user should have had encountered many of them. But the from

Figure X suggests that only a third of the respondents (34.1%) have seen many

of them. There are more respondents (51.8%) who have rarely seen any of these

sketchy products, with 14.1% saying that they have never seem any of it.

Ability to recognize a Political Agenda

9, 10.6%

Yes, on several occasions

38, 44.7% I can't recognize it
No, I have not

38, 44.7%
 Figure 4.20

19. Have you noticed any piece of information related

to pandemic that exploited the situation to gain or
f %
consolidate power? OR politicizing this pandemic to
further a certain agenda?
Yes, on several occasions 38 44.7%
I can’t recognize it 38 44.7%
No, I have not 9 10.6%
Table 4.23 Question 19

As much as many took advantage of this pandemic to sell certain

products, many politicians and political parties saw opportunity to exploit this

pandemic to further their own agenda. In the Philippines, we have seen how this

pandemic was used by political candidates running in the upcoming 2022

election. Some politicians used this crisis to consolidate their powers like how

President Rodrigo Duterte was granted nearly limitless emergency powers

(Brown et al. 2020). There are many others like this and is too great to not be

noticed by a media literate person. The results, however, shows that close to half

of the respondents (44.7^) can recognize it claiming that they have noticed it on

several occasions. Meanwhile, the other half (44.7%) can’t recognize it and

10.6% saying that they have not, which means that it is more likely that they can’t

also recognize it.

 Awareness on the Purposes of Media

29, 34.1%

Yes, I'm fully aware

I can't really tell
No, I'm not

56, 65.9%

Figure 4.21

20. Are you aware that media messages can be

made with certain purposes and motivation such as f %
gaining profit or power?
Yes, I’m fully aware 56 65.9%
I can’t really tell 29 34.1%
No, I’m not 0 0%
Table 4.24 Question 20