MIT 1025 Lecture Notes PDF

Preview

Summary

Download MIT 1025 Lecture Notes PDF

Description

Monday, October 1, 2018 Critical: Exercising or involving careful judgement or judicious evaluation. Self-Reflection: Careful and intentional consideration of your own beliefs and behaviour. Page 14 of Heath: “There is a useful distinction to be made between critique that seeks to expand consciousness and harsh criticism that attacks or trashes.” Objectivity: Trying to see something from a neutral point of view. Ideas on Critical Thinking - Knowing how and when to think critically is important. - Being obliged to change our minds when facts change. - RED: - Recognize assumptions → ability to separate fact from opinion - Evaluate arguments → analyzing information as accurately as possible, questioning quality of information - Draw conclusions Unpacking a text - Identifying an argument - Explicit → clear, straightforward, maybe in the title, intro, abstract, or deck - Implicit → suggested, implied 1. Read the text more than once 2. Makes notes on what it’s about 3. Write out in your own words the claims being made, evidence, key arguments 4. Make notes on your own scholarly opinion → do you agree? Evaluating Sources (RADAR) R - relevance → how relevant is the information to your work? A - authority (peer-reviewed) → who wrote/published this? Is it a real, legit journal? D - date → we want the knowledge to be as relevant as possible. Depending on the content, the information may be too old or you may be able to use it in a contemporary context A - appearance → what form of source is it R - reason → why was it published (commercial reasons, the government)?

October 15, 2018: Yimin -

Information always benefits somebody

-

Identifying a conspiracy theory → nothing ever happens by accident, nothing is ever as it seems, everything is connected Conspiracy theories can turn out to be true - Legacy/aftermath is distrust of government There must be a motive for a conspiracy theory to be created There is always a kernel of truth in the lies the government makes Awareness can protect us from being influenced by fake news Why are conspiracies so compelling? - Provide simple explanations that align with personal beliefs - We are wired to make and see connections to create meaning - Overgeneralization (assuming patterns apply to other cases), Confirmation bias - Psychological mechanisms are built to exaggerate, to protect → perpetuates fear, impulse - Bullshit Assymetrical: “The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is of bigger magnitude than to produce it” - No way to disprove a conspiracy, because any evidence against it can be twisted in favour of the theory - “Secret knowledge” → you feel superior to others - WHY: ideology, money, status & attention - HOW: participatory culture (sharing things w friends), networks, bots, amplification & framing

KEY IDEAS ● Pizzagate article demonstrates… ○ Fake news has real consequences → worthy of research and study ○ Value and importance of real, in-depth investigative reporting and journalism ○ Echo chambers → People often only consume media that echoes their own beliefs, interests, perspectives. Normalizes your way of seeing things, you no longer have unintended encounters with citizens who think differently than you. We often do not realize we are in echo chambers ○ Role/responsibility of private companies → private companies are here to make money, not vouch for social democracy. What should we expect of them? ● Marwick and Lewis article: ○ Agenda-Setting → Telling us not what to think… but what to think about. Someone makes a decision of what constitutes news and what is worthy of being read. Suggests that news is objective. ○ “For manipulators, it doesn’t matter if the media is reporting on a story in order to debunk or dismiss it; the important thing is getting it covered in the first place.” p. 39 ○ People produce fake news for many reasons → attention, status, trolling ○ Bots: Social bots create content and interact with people. Used for political

○ ○

reasons. Often difficult for average users to distinguish between real users and bots Trolling: A deliberate form of misleading, provoking, and making fun of others online One troll surrounded by thousands of bots

Monday, October 22, 2018: Anabel Quan-Haase Social Media Data & Research vs. Survey Data - Information is direct and unfiltered → no desirability bias as you are directly observing human behaviour - We choose to portray our best selves, or the self our audience would want to see on social media - Attention economy → our worth is dependent on our attention - Big Data → data is real time. Data is the new oil - Can be analyzed very easily on a large scale - We give away data for free because we get to use the platform in exchange (Facebook, Snapchat...etc) - Perseverance very central to this kind of inquiry - Often no footprint to follow Themes of social media - Enables social communities - Interacting with information (likes, comments, shares) - Content (photos, videos, posts) Social media research questions - Methodological questions - Ethical questions - Many people who are trying to shape policy want their data to be used, their name to be associated, opinions to be known - Questions of scale - How can we influence decision making of public policy? - Questions relating to social media use itself - Questions that inform our understanding of social phenomena Cambridge Scandal - Personality test - Target people’s FB profile based on their personality to influence them to vote a certain way - Big data is powerful and does not have to be used at the same time. Can be used later to influence beliefs over time

Social Media Model - People like to use social media because of maintaining friendships, social reinforcements, gaining information Promises of Social Media Data - Inform policy making, meaningful Big Data Study - Law of Data Self-Determination → you own your own data, not a search engine or any key players - We can leave behind information that may be condemning, and we can recreate ourselves - You can select to delete the data forever - Google must create an algorithm in such a way that your data can never be found again - Consequence → Google becomes harbinger of whether a piece of info should stay online or be deleted forever - We should all have the right to self recreate - Russia allows politicians to choose what pieces of information about you will be removed from the web - Companies, old players (news outlets, experts) are active in this debate - Citizens are not → language too legal (right to be forgotten), may be reading information but not be interacting with it, experts dominant the space too much Veracity: Truthfulness KEY IDEAS: ● Front stage of social media (the attention economy) vs. backstage (who we are when we’re not performing) ● “Nothing is free” → We are the commodity → we are the thing being bought and sold (Dallas Smythe) ○ What information, privacy are we willing to give up in order to use a specific platform? Selling info to third parties… ○ My eyeballs are sold to advertisers and my search patterns, connections, likes are sold to advertisers

Monday, October 29, 2018: Research Ethics -

Research ethics are constantly changing, very fluid What is ethics?

-

-

-

-

-

-

Normative questions… “should” Moral theory → rightness and wrongness, virtues, utility, deontology (avoiding using people just to use them) - Moral distress and conflicting feelings… the “yuck” factor Scientific/Social Value vs. Participant Protection - Must find a balance - Participant protection - Respect for autonomy (Informed consent = voluntary, comprehensive, ongoing. Capacity = ability to understand + appreciate risks. Option to withdraw = research is not obligatory, right of free choice) - Beneficence (best interest = concern for welfare, obligation to do good, benefits outweigh risks) - Non-maleficence (do no harm) - Justice (fairness and equality, justifiable inclusion, balancing power relationship. Substantive, distributive, restorative) Socially Vulnerable Groups - Should still do research on members of vulnerable groups - Require additional protections - Any group at an increased risk of experiencing additional or greater danger is vulnerable What justifies research? - Equipoise: The need to determine what is right/best. Honest professional disagreement among research community. Why do we need research ethics? - Historical examples of abuse in research - Research exposes people to risk for the benefit of others, ensures funding from Tri-Council - Promotes societal trust in findings - Protects participant’s Risk of the Therapeutic Misconception - Participant believes they will benefit from the research - Improper understanding, inadequate comprehension

Research: An undertaking intended to extend knowledge through a disciplined inquiry and/or systematic investigation (p.13) Ethics: Moral principles that govern a person’s behaviour or the conducting of an activity; the branch of knowledge that deals with moral principles Research Ethics: Provides guidelines and recommendations for appropriately contributing to knowledge advancement. - New field → about 70 years old - There is no legislation in place to enforce ethical research → instead, funding is pulled by Tri-Council and government

Tri-Council: Created ethical guidelines in Canada. Research Ethics History - Nuremberg Code (1948): medical experiments on concentration camp prisoners without consent → voluntary participation and informed consent - Tri-Council Policy Statements (1998)

Monday, November 5, 2018 Dallas Smythe - Media sees the audience as a commodity to be sold + a workforce - Becomes a commodity when they are exposed to advertising - Media does not actually sell the TIME SLOT to the advertisers… it sells the people who are watching at the TIME SLOT - Audiences are bought by advertisers… what are we willing to give up? - The commodification of our data Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research Methods - Empirical Research is based on observed and measured observation and derives knowledge from actual experience rather than from theory or belief. Can be qualitative or quantitative - Quantitative → experimental and statistical - Methods: Field research, case studies, open-ended interviews and observations - Qualitative → naturalistic and interpretive… rich descriptions of behaviours and realities - Methods: Experiments, surveys, structured interviews and observations - Textual analysis, coding for themes - Mixed method study → using both qualitative and quantitative methods Public Media - Not just about the audience being a profit-bearing commodity - Example: The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) - Federal Crown corporation (more arms-length away from the government) - National public broadcaster for TV and radio - Private Media → Globe & Mail, CNN - 7 things we expect out of public media 1. For the public good, not a commodity ● For democracy ● “Communication that is motivated by public benefit - not the drive for profit - and contributes to the diversity, education, civic disclosure, creative expression of communities and the nation as a whole”

2. ● 3. ● 4. ● ● ● 5. ● ●

Entertainment and information/different points of view/welcomes debate Ex: Hockey Night in Canada Relatively objective Media is never fully objective, but tries Ideally free from commercial and political pressures Audience is the commodity Financial support from different foundations, taxpayer dollars, advertisements Less commercial + political than private media Universality Access should be available to all audiences Made for all citizens of the country… rather than private media who creates content to attract the target audience of advertisers 6. Reflects the interests and tastes of citizens diversity + encourages unity and community ● Provides a voice for marginalized people ● Tries to create community 7. Deciding factor of success: quality programming and audience size ● Difficult to assess the success of programming on public media… what is quality and what is not?

Developing a Good Research Topic - Topic strongly interests you, is creative (and original), not too broad - Narrowing a topic → add more context (geographical, historical, political) - Find the problem - So what? Active vs. Passive Voice - Active: Subject appears before the verb - More specific, direct, concise - I edited and proofread because it is important - Passive: Verb appears before subject - Actor is unknown, vagueness is intended, person or thing acted on is emphasized - Editing and proofreading is important Fallacies - Key Fallacies from Chapter 5 - Genetic fallacy → based on who made the claim - Appeal to person/ ad hominem fallacy → attacking the person who made the claim - Appeal to… - Popularity/the masses/common practice/tradition/ignorance/emotion → lots of people agree, do it - Red herring → using an irrelevant event to lead someone astray

-

- Visual, verbal, written Strawman → simplify someone’s position to better attack them Hasty Generalization → drawing a conclusion about a target group on the basis of too small a sample

Monday, November 12, 2018 Technological Determinism - Theory that technology is an autonomous force that changes society - Technological revolution is a dramatic and inevitable driving force with deep consequences - Example of a cause claim/causal argument - Versions of Technological Determinism - Hard → dominant, absolute, the main driver of change shaping history and society - Soft → other factors are at play; one important force amongst others Characteristics of Technological Determinist Narrative 1. Technology is the driving force of history, causing most things to happen. Not the only thing, but most important thing 2. Technology is separate from society and culture → it just shows up and affects us 3. Technology is autonomous or semi-autonomous → has its own mind, acting on its own as opposed to being a tool 4. Technology has effects and impacts → causing good or bad things to happen 5. Technology is overgeneralized 6. Technology operates under laws → this will always absolutely happen Ronald Wright - Where did we come from? What are we? Where are we going as a civilization? - “Despite certain events of the 20th century, most people in the Western world still believe in the assumption that a pattern of change exists in the history of mankind… that it consists of irreversible changes in one direction, and that this direction is towards improvement.” - Belief that technology will lead us to a more advanced society, betterment - Technology today is viewed as: - The catalyst/the stimulus for progress - The symbol of progress - Progress Trap → we still believe in “the promise of progress without limit and without end.” - “Technology is addictive. Material progress creates problems that are - or seem to be - solvable only by further progress”

Problematic → we think we can solve our technological problems by constantly building new technology Technological determinism makes us lose sight of our power as people to change our world… that we create technology and we use technologies as tools Technological determinism takes away our agency -

-

Monday, November 19, 2018 A Media Studies Genealogy - Media research has been conducted by scholars in other disciplines dating back to the late 19th century Administrative vs. Critical Research - Administrative: research that is carried through the service of some kind of administrative agency of public or private character - Research is done on behalf of government agency, corporations, or businesses - Goal: to explore the effects of different media on society; on people’s behaviour with the goal of using these media more effectively. Making sure media was being used as effectively as possible - Academics were trying to provide quantitative, objective proof and evidence of the impact of media (statistics to uncover how media impacts what people, thought, bought). Borrowing methods from natural sciences - Some took issue with this kind of administrative research, especially the Frankfurt School - Critical - Four themes of critical research - Media scholars are interested in communication, culture, power - Not only interested in this intersection of power, but actually want to do something about it → using research to try and change unequal distribution of power in the world - Interested in history to help us understand contemporary phenomena - Skeptical view (question, critique) of ‘mainstream’ media - Frankfurt School rose in response to administrative research - Questioned business and government. Belief we are supposed to question people in power, society, democracy - Critiqued and was concerned of the idea of the ‘cultural industry’ - making something that should be at the heart of a society and a culture (ex: film, music, books) into a commodity meant to make money in a capitalist society - The dominant class in society (the capitalists/businessmen) not only owned the means of material production (factories, raw materials, machines, land) while labourers laboured for a wage so that the capitalists could make money off of their backs

-

-

Frankfurt School believed capitalists also (with the help of political elite) controlled the production of society’s dominant ideas and values (newspaper, radio stations, TV stations) - Hypodermic Needle Model → cultural industry is the needle. Capitalist holds the needle, and puts certain values into the needle and injects them into society - Frankfurt School were technological determinists Media scholars’ thinking differs on a big, broad spectrum → Frankfurt School (Media holds a lot of power) vs. People have agency (Media isn’t just created for governments...etc)

Media Studies Landscape in Canada Today - Question intersection of communication, culture, power - Critically analyze mainstream media - We have a long history of arguing for the importance of public media, not private media - We want to make a positive difference - We are interdisciplinary - “A common link between the different facets of Media Studies is an interest in the creation, distribution, and consumption of information (both the information content, and the infrastructures through which it’s conveyed)”

Monday, November 26, 2018 KEY IDEAS for the Quiz ● How to find, use, source academic/scholarly sources ○ Difference between academic and popular sources ○ Lecture + librarian Denise Horoky) ● What is an argument? ○ How to recognize one? Fundamentals of analysis: decoding the argument, restating the arguments, commenting, conclusions ● Difference between criticism and critical thinking (now what to think, but how to think) ○ Lecture, chapter 1 of textbook, Heath, Chatfield video) ○ Self-reflection (careful, intentional thinking of your own behaviour and beliefs) ○ RED (Recognize Assumptions, Evaluate Arguments, Draw conclusions) ● Key Terms in Chapter 1 ○ Statement or claim ○ Explanation ○ Premises ○ An argument ○ A conclusion ○ Implicit vs. explicit argument ○ Logic: The study of good reasoning, or inference, and the rules that govern it

○

●

●

● ●

●

●

● ●

●

Inference: Reasoning from a premise to a conclusion based on those premises ■ We infer the conclusion of an argument based on its premise. How to evaluate sources ○ R - relevant ○ A - authority ○ D - date ○ A - appearance ○ R - reason Making sense of arguments ○ Chapter 3 key terms ○ Do not need to know: disjunctive syllogism, denying the antecedent, affirming the consequent, independent premise, dependent premise Different kinds of plagiarism ○ Wente, Hedges Fake news with Yimin Chen ○ Critically think about the difference between real and fake… conspiracy theories ○ Why are they compelling? Circulation can’t stop, Chapter 4 of textbook ○ Pizzagate… real-life consequences of fake news, value of investigative reporting ○ Marwick and Lewis… what is fake news, how to tell its fake. IGNORE Frankfu...