RC For 11th March

Stop. Think. Fraud. You may well have seen or heard the Home Office advert in
recent weeks that’s trying to educate us in all the ways online crooks are out to
cheat us.They seem so plausible, these cyber crooks, as they try to trick us into
handing over our passwords, bank details, PIN numbers, identities and cash. The
website tells us that one in 17 adults in England and Wales were victims of fraud in
one year—nearly three million of us.That’s a lot of people, but a drop in the ocean
compared with the number of us being fooled and deceived in other ways. One
respected survey showed that nearly two thirds of us can no longer tell the
difference between good journalism and falsehood. Around the same are finding it
harder to tell if a piece of news was produced by a respected news organisation.So
that’s about 24m adults—never mind kids or teenagers—in the dark about who to
believe. And if that doesn’t make you “stop, think, fraud”, then nothing will.This
week I found myself with a bunch of smart 19-year-olds, all starting life at uni.
Where, I asked them, did they get their news? For most of them the answer was a
social media channel—Instagram, Reddit, TikTok.

My follow up was to ask where did the news come from before it was published on
social media? This caused a certain amount of confusion: it seemed to be a novel
thought. I prompted them to consider whether Instagram itself employed any
reporters—and, if not, might the news have originated somewhere else?The penny
dropped, even if they weren’t entirely sure where such and such a screen grab or
picture or link had begun life. Only three out of a group of nearly 20 could name
the origin of a piece of news they’d recently consumed on social media.I then
switched to what, with a sinking heart, we’re learning to call mainstream media.
Not one member of the group had, of course, paid for news or could imagine doing
so. One or two looked at the BBC.

They could not, with one exception, say whether either the Daily
Mail or Mirror was right-wing or left-wing. They had no idea who owned a single
newspaper, though one or two had heard of an abstract figure called Rupert
Murdoch. They were not markedly interested in questioning why anyone would
want to own a newspaper, or who determined what “news” was.We moved onto
facts, and whether a measure of agreement over them was necessary in order to
have a functioning society. One or two were sceptical as to whether there were
even such things as facts. “Whose facts?” they wanted to know. After some
discussion, there was some consensus that it would be difficult to get to grips with
the climate crisis if we couldn’t agree that there was one.

I’ve no wish to be at all disobliging about these youngsters, who were

tremendously smart, likeable, and curious. Most of them sort of kept abreast with
some news, though two said they had zero interest in current affairs. But at no
point had they been encouraged to be critical, sceptical or even especially inquiring
about what they were being told about the world around them. The role of the
national press in informing, or shaping, public opinion seemed a genuinely
unfamiliar concept.

But then we have recently had a prime minister—who studied philosophy, politics
and economics at Merton College, Oxford, no less—who sincerely appears
to believe that GB News is a more reliable guide to our world than the BBC. Nor is
Liz Truss alone in our political and financial classes. Never mind the three million
falling for online fraudsters, where’s the campaign of information to help the 20+
million of us who are struggling to negotiate their way through a digital thicket of
disinformation, trolls, bias, propaganda, PR, disguised advertising, churnalism,
lies, deep fakes, AI-generated stuff, hallucinations and conspiracy wing nuts? With
a bit of truth somewhere in the mix.

Questions:
1. Which of the following statements, if true, would weaken the author's claim that
young people struggle to assess the credibility of social media news?

A. Social media platforms are increasingly implementing fact-checking measures.

B. Traditional news outlets also face challenges in maintaining objectivity online.
C. Young adults are more likely to engage in online discussions about current events.
D. Schools are incorporating media literacy education into their curriculum.

Q2. All of the following can be inferred from the passage EXCEPT:

A. The author believes critical thinking skills are essential for navigating the modern
media landscape.
B. Social media algorithms can create echo chambers that reinforce existing beliefs.
C. Traditional news outlets are always a reliable source of unbiased information.
D. Young people today are more likely to get their news from social media than
traditional media.

Q3. According to the passage, what was the biggest misconception held by the 19-year-
olds about the news they consume on social media?

A. That the news originates from social media platforms themselves.

B. That the news they see is always biased and untrustworthy.
C. That social media is a more reliable source of news than traditional media.
D. That they cannot distinguish between fact and opinion in social media news.

Q4. What is the main point the author is trying to make in this passage?

A. Social media is a dangerous source of news and should be avoided.

B. Young people today are not interested in current aQairs.
C. People need to be more critical and questioning of the information they consume.
D. Traditional news media is superior to social media news.