499 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2019
    1. “Devoting 80 percent of field agents to stopping international terrorism including Islamic extremism and only 20 percent to stopping domestic terrorism including far right and white supremacist extremism.”

      i found this pretty interesting on how the percentages are split up. i thought there would have been more equal numbers but i was wrong but i would need more evidence or i would need to look into this.

    2. defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America.

      I didn't know that this was true and know knowing this it is awful and it just goes to show how "serious " they take these things and how big chunk of the US population are fighting for their lives on a daily base and this is now just coming up as recognized problem.

    3. To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America.

      This is interesting, I was not aware that there was a law defining it and yet not a law that charges people for it. Something I will probably want to look up later.

    4. To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America. People who conspire with international terrorists—even if they aren’t materially involved in an act of violence—are charged with “acts of terrorism transcending international boundaries.” But someone who sends pipe bombs to Democrats; plows through a crowd of anti-racism protesters in Charlottesville, Va.; or shoots up a church in Charleston, S.C., will not face domestic terrorism charges.

      It's interesting how domestic terrorism is defined but not charged as a crime. Instead acts of domestic terrorism are charged as criminal acts such as first degree murder. Those charged with terrorist acts on the international level are taking the crime into accounts of national security and attacking the national American identity.

    5. I believe that we, the people of the US, are, collectively, becoming less racist; but one would need to step back to view a wide timeline to see it. Extremism and hate crimes are an inevitability in a country so seriously divided. (divided by its current leader, whether it was his intent or not)

    6. civil rights protests and the Black Power movement that FBI officials called “the greatest threat to internal security of the country.”

      I dont think this statement is correct nor valid, and is an opinion of people in power

    7. The subcommittee noted that there was a 17 percent increase in reported hate crimes in 2017 from the previous year and a 31 percent increase since 2014.

      Even though I need to fact check this, I do believe this. There have been a lot of hate crimes in the past two years.

    8. To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America. People who conspire with international terrorists—even if they aren’t materially involved in an act of violence—are charged with “acts of terrorism transcending international boundaries.” But someone who sends pipe bombs to Democrats; plows through a crowd of anti-racism protesters in Charlottesville, Va.; or shoots up a church in Charleston, S.C., will not face domestic terrorism charges.

      Its interesting that we focus so much on whats going on internationally, but can even stop whats going on in our own back yard. We have always been very focused on whats going on in other countries, but very rarely here.

    9. civil rights protests and the Black Power movement that FBI officials called “the greatest threat to internal security of the country.”

      In my opinion I don't believe it is fair to call the black power movement the GREATEST threat to internal security of the country. I believe this comment may be inflated a bit.

    10. To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America. People who conspire with international terrorists—even if they aren’t materially involved in an act of violence—are charged with “acts of terrorism transcending international boundaries.” But someone who sends pipe bombs to Democrats; plows through a crowd of anti-racism protesters in Charlottesville, Va.; or shoots up a church in Charleston, S.C., will not face domestic terrorism charges.

      The American government is ferociously working on to put a stop to international terrorism whereas the local terrorism in their own country is increasing day by day #whitesupremacy#local terrorism #respectblackpeople.

    11. When it comes to any form of resistance or fight for equality, America will always paint black people as terrorists. L

      This is true. We have this problem, that when something bad happens, we always see black people as the ones who are guilty. I watched the movie, "THE HATE U GIVE" which is based off the book by Angie Thomas that is about a girl, whose childhood best friend gets murdered by a white police officer for no reason and when he dies everyone is calling him a thug, gang member or a drug dealer just because he's black. We need to change this. We need a change.

    12. defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America. People who conspire with international terrorists—even if they aren’t materially involved in an act of violence—are charged with “acts of terrorism transcending international boundaries.” But someone who sends pipe bombs to Democrats; plows through a crowd of anti-racism protesters in Charlottesville, Va.; or shoots up a church in Charleston, S.C., will not face domestic terrorism charges.

      This is interesting that these types of acts don't qualify as domestic terrorism.

    13. The subcommittee noted that there was a 17 percent increase in reported hate crimes in 2017 from the previous year and a 31 percent increase since 2014. And in spite of the ADL’s report that white supremacists were responsible for 78 percent of extremist murders in 2018, the FBI still dedicates most of its time, money and manpower to investigating and stopping international terrorism.

      This needs to change. We need to turn our focus to the needs of our yet underrepresented citizens. We have neglected domestic matters for far too long, and the mass shootings and hate crimes are a direct result of not paying attention to the depravity and horror of the hate that is among us.

    14. Investigation admitted that prejudiced assumptions against the Black Lives Matter movement, Muslim Americans and black identity extremists was all a lie. Intelligence officials sat in front of lawmakers and openly admitted that white supremacists and right-wing violence are the biggest domestic terror threat but also admitted that federal agencies aren’t really doing anything about it. On Tuesday, June 4, the House Oversight subcomm

      Fantastic! It is about time.

    1. What do I mean by that? Let’s use an analogy: which technique do you think would prevent more car accidents? A three-second check every time you switch lanes A twenty-second check executed every time you think a car might be there

      I like this analogy a lot because it brings in a real scenario and to me i learn a lot more that way rather a made up example.

    2. I found it interesting that he would/ could even question something so well know. It just goes to show how vital it is to really check your sources and whether or no they are legit.

    3. Because it is these simple behaviors, applied as habits and enforced as norms, that have the power to change the web as we know it, to break our cycle of reaction and recognition, and ultimately to get even our deeper investigations off to a better start.

      I think this stood out to me because often times, all it takes for misinformation to spread and become viral is for people to simply not check their sources. Even if all it is is a quick Google search. I think that we should be more aware of the importance of checking what we are reading on the internet instead of always completely believing it. Not only for us, but to help stop the spread of misleading or outright wrong information.

    4. I thought this was a really useful method. It's short and effective and I can definitely see myself utilizing this method in the future. I know how easy it is to fall victim to a belief that someone with a blue check is to be trusted so I'm happy to now have a tool to combat that with.

    5. More people than you would think believe that the blue checkmark = trustworthy. But all the blue checkmark really does is say that the person is who they say they are, that they are the person of that name and not an imposter. Your two-second “mirror and head-check” here is going to be to always, always hover, and see what they are verified for. In

      I think this is a useful message because there a numerous fake accounts on twitter and other social media sites and furthermore just because they have a blue check mark doesn't mean they are a reliable source of information.

    6. it is these simple behaviors, applied as habits and enforced as norms, that have the power to change the web as we know it, to break our cycle of reaction and recognition, and ultimately to get even our deeper investigations off to a better start.

      I believe this is a very useful and honestly basic idea that I'm surprised not everyone implements in their day-to-day life. Caulfield provides a very accessible way for users to easily double-check their information sources. Thorough implementation of such techniques to improve web literacy will definitely change information on the internet and media as we know it. However, we also have to hold media (and even legitimate sites) responsible for delivering a more unbiased and closer-to-truth interpretation of news and information.

    7. You can absolutely do this every time before you share. And given it is so easy, it’s irresponsible not to.

      I think the author is right. If you really want to share viable and credible information, it is our duty to investigate further. If misinformation spreads then it would be our fault.

    8. always, always hover, and see what they are verified for.

      I didn't know you could hover. I really don't use twitter that much, but now that I know I am going check all those little blue check marks. Expect for the ones I truly know are real. I am learning so much from this article.

    9. Again, same process. Now does this mean that you are 100% sure that it’s not Billie Joe that wrote that article? No — there’s a slight slight chance that maybe somehow the lead singer of Green Day wrote a —

      I kind of can't believe that someone did do any fact checking at the Washington Post. It seems like its happening more and more, where sources that supposed to be reputable let something they shouldn't slip past.

    10. Go up to the “omnibar” Strip off everything after the domain name, type wikipedia and press enter This generates a Google search for that URL with the Wikipedia page at the top Click that link, then check in the sidebar that the URL matches. Forty-nine out of fifty times it will. The fiftieth time you may have some work to do.

      I have never seen this method. I really want to use it on everything I see now. I will be more conscious of using it more.

    11. One of the things I’ve been trying to convince people for the past year and a half is that the only viable literacy solution to web misinformation involves always checking any information in your stream that you find interesting, emotion-producing, or shareable.

      Sometimes I wish people would fact check, before posting it to Facebook. I am not saying I always check but if it is an interest topic I am defiantly checking.

    12. Maybe you think you do this, or you can really “recognize” what’s fake by looking at it. I am here to tell you that statistically it’s far more likely you’re fooling yourself.

      A reminder not to fool yourself in beliveing something just from looking at it. Always do some research!

    13. Again, same process. Now does this mean that you are 100% sure that it’s not Billie Joe that wrote that article? No — there’s a slight slight chance that maybe somehow the lead singer of Green Day wrote a — Nah, you know what? It’s not him. Or if it is, the chances are so infinitesimal it’s not worth spending any more time on it. Find another source.

      I AM SURPRISED TO LEARN THAT THE INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET CAN BE MANIPULATED EASILY AND WRONG INFORMATION CAN BE PRESENTED TO US. AND WE WILL BELIEVE ON IT UNTIL WE GET TO KNOW THE REAL TRUTH.

    14. One of the things I’ve been trying to convince people for the past year and a half is that the only viable literacy solution to web misinformation involves always checking any information in your stream that you find interesting, emotion-producing, or shareable. It’s not enough to check the stuff that is suspicious: if you apply your investigations selectively, you’ve already lost the battle.

      I agree that is very important that you have to check your sources. Yo don't know for sure if these sources are correct or nor. This information from Mike Caulfield is very useful for me, now that I am using different tools.

    15. Mike Caulfield's methods of fact and source-checking are golden. They could avoid a lot of angry dialogue and calling out I see daily on many of my social media sites. People are just too ready to "gut react" today, which leads to a lot of nasty exchanges online between friends and strangers alike. And, as a society, we are too ready to believe what we see. This behavior is unthinking and dangerous, and keeps us simple-minded. "Thoughts about the relationship between critical thinking and cynicism." I love this guy!

    1. Nipsey was beloved in his community because he worked to revitalize the neighborhood by opening businesses, creating jobs and opportunities:

      Nipsey was an important cultural icon who not only was a great artist but also a giving member of his community. He will be missed.

  2. Jul 2019
    1. Meme creators and posters have been sued for using people’s images without permission, especially those who were not already public figures. In 2003, the parents of the unwilling star of the “Star Wars Kid” video sued their son’s classmates for posting the video online.

      That's just awful. Can't get passed how sharing someones image or a video without their knowledge can lead to cyberbullying and over all is a huge invasion of privacy that we should all be entitled to.

    2. In using images taken from creative works or private life, memes show how copyright law intersects with issues of internet use and privacy.

      Memes are made by using creative works, or from people's private lives. Memes spread fast over the internet causing havoc and interfering with people's privacy.

    3. Image-based memes involve, primarily, an image created by somebody. Sometimes the meme creator is also the image creator, but often, when involving movie stills or images of celebrities, the image’s copyright is owned by someone else. American copyright law gives creators the exclusive rights of reproduction, modification, distribution, performance, and display. The viral spread of a meme infringes on theses protections as the original image is modified and then displayed, distributed and reproduced when posted and reposted.

      I believe that doctrine of "fair use" allows for use of copyrighted work, however when a meme goes viral, there isn't a way to stop distribution and reposts. This is like a wildfire that cannot be stopped.

    4. Lantagne notes that if memes are considered a form of communication, they are also subject to the limits placed on speech including the rights of others to privacy.

      It's interesting that memes going virally replicated is a form of digital communication as the article states. Could memes be a form of participatory culture? If so, then a percentage of memes are used purposely to promote a celebrity or make non-public person a celebrity; and they are also used inadvertently to the detriment of someone, to the point of damaging someone's life or reputation.

    5. . If you create or post one, remember to pay attention to the source of the image.

      I agree. However, does memes database have a written netiquette rules in place?

    6. When you see a meme going around, give a thought to the subject of that meme image, whose life may forever be changed.

      The article on the dark side of "Plane Bae" illustrates the reality of this statement.

    7. Meme histories are tracked from first appearance, providing a reference of viral memes.

      I would love to study the spread of some of my favorite memes to learn when they originated and hypothesize about how they reached my screen. Fascinating!

    8. When memes or the subjects of a meme are used for commercial purposes without permission, the meme creator may sue, as the effect of the commercial use on the market value of the original meme usually prevents a finding of fair use.

      This quote can tell that it is necessary to protect the copyright of the memes creators, which can create the healthy and sustainable development in this field.

    9. Lantagne and Patel agree on the inability of copyright law to fully address the subject of memes, given their cultural importance as what Lantagne calls “pure engines of expression with their own symbolic vocabulary” while also relying, in Patel’s words, on “massive unauthorized copying” to attain such importance.

      I think this speaks of the freedom of speech in that someone can use an image to make a meme if they are being creative, but not doing it for monetary gain.

    10. “[j]ust as genes propagate themselves in the gene pool by leaping from body to body via sperms or eggs, so memes propagate themselves in the meme pool by leaping from brain to brain via a process which, in the broad sense, can be called imitation.”

      very interesting way to think about it, i never thought of it like that.

    11. she identifies use ranging from “static,” a relatively straightforward reproduction of an image, to “mutating,” in which the role of the internet is directly responsible for the meme’s alteration from the original to the point that “[m]utating memes, because of their unique characteristics, are more like ideas,” thus unprotected under copyright.

      this very true. the meaning of a meme depends on how someone interprets it; the message they are trying to convey, I never really thought about how memes can be apart of culture and jump from person to person giving memes new meanings.

    12. Meme creators and posters have been sued for using people’s images without permission, especially those who were not already public figures. In 2003, the parents of the unwilling star of the “Star Wars Kid” video sued their son’s classmates for posting the video online.

      I have often wondered about this type of scenario, where a photograph of someone becomes a meme - but it gets out of control before they have the permission of the person in the photo. Unfortunately, there will probably always be the meme floating out there somewhere, even if you win your lawsuit.

    13. Sometimes the meme creator is also the image creator, but often, when involving movie stills or images of celebrities, the image’s copyright is owned by someone else. American copyright law gives creators the exclusive rights of reproduction, modification, distribution, performance, and display. The viral spread of a meme infringes on theses protections as the original image is modified and then displayed, distributed and reproduced when posted and reposted. However, within copyright law exists the doctrine of fair use, which allows for use of a copyrighted work in the creation of new work without permission, as long as the use fits within certain parameters. A legal finding of fair use takes into account the following factors: The purpose of the use, The amount of the work to be used, The effect of the use on the market for or value of the original work, and The nature of the copyrighted work. There is no official definitive answer for whether a use can be considered fair, as every case must be judged on its own merits, but there are some types of use generally allowed under fair use, including criticism and commentary, parody, journalism, education, and research.

      These are important parameters regarding fair use. Using memes by a corporation for commercial use seems to be the most blatant breech of this type, as also communicated in the lecture.

    14. Meme creators and posters have been sued for using people’s images without permission, especially those who were not already public figures.

      This still violates people’s rights of privacy. The memes can also be closely related to the law in terms of privacy. This article provides readers with more information about how to protect the user’s privacy based on the open and widely used internet.

    15. If you create or post one, remember to pay attention to the source of the image. Your best bet is to start with an image or clip that is already labeled for reuse or is in the public domain, meaning out of copyright protection altogether. Google Images search tools provides such a filter, or try the Creative Commons search for work licensed for reuse via Creative Commons licenses.

      Even if not creating or posting a meme, this is very good info to know for checking sources for using images. I'll be paying much closer attention.

    16. The viral spread of a meme infringes on theses protections as the original image is modified and then displayed, distributed and reproduced when posted and reposted.

      I've gotten a full education about memes this module as I'd never thought anything about them, and didn't know that people alter them. It is then very interesting to consider the ethics.

    1. We are all watching each other, mining each other’s lives for “content” that we give for free to large corporations who then monetize it.

      It's so true, we keep our eyes and ears open towards strangers hoping to find something entertaining enough to put on the internet. I've never taken a photo of a stranger or recorded a stranger.. because first of all, I've never felt there was a real reason to. Secondly, I wouldn't want a stranger doing that to me. We all do weird, goofy, embarrassing things.. no one wants that unknowingly posted for others entertainment.

    2. The story’s charm disguises the invasion of privacy at its heart: the way technology is both eroding our personal boundaries and coercing us in deleterious ways.

      I agree that technology is affecting our personal boundaries, and forcing people to be public when they would rather stay private.

    3. This is the problem with ex post facto consent being used to justify these sorts of invasions. What if it’s not given? The world floods into your life anyway. What had been private is now uncontrollably crowdsourced. Your consent becomes a trifling detail in a story about you that suddenly belongs to everyone else.

      I agree that ex post facto consent is allowing for a invasion of privacy that puts your private life into the public eye.

    4. Until she has nothing left to give, and the next thread about some other person plucked from obscurity comes along.

      It's interesting that the tweeter, the memes and other sites are seen/used as net-soap-operas. However, one could use them wisely and turn around the negative intricate. But for this to happen, we need to educate people not only how to look for information but also how to use them wisely following some basic netiquette rules in the fast paced digital world.

    5. We are all watching each other, mining each other’s lives for “content” that we give for free to large corporations who then monetize it.

      It's sad that people allow the companies to manipulate their own lives as content for the monetary benefits of the companies.

    6. There are also sobering lessons here about the limits and ethics of “sousveillance,” the use of our handheld devices to record from “below.” (This is in contrast to surveillance from on-high, a la CCTV or drones.)

      new vocab word! and an important concept to consider in conversations about ethics and civil life.

    7. Of course, the sexual implication is something he’d be praised for, while the woman is attacked.

      Ugh, this is very uncool (though predictable).

    8. At a certain level of virality, you cannot stop motivated people on the internet from piercing your veils.

      According to this sentence, it shows that the internet is still a dangerous place for all people. People still should be cautious to protect their privacy.

    9. The story’s charm disguises the invasion of privacy at its heart: the way technology is both eroding our personal boundaries and coercing us in deleterious ways.

      This tells that the technology is threatening people’s personal boundaries and privacy. The author has introduced the disadvantages of this phenomenon in many aspects. The author has provided a lot of ideas about how people understand the dark side of the social media.

    10. What had been private is now uncontrollably crowdsourced. Your consent becomes a trifling detail in a story about you that suddenly belongs to everyone else. It doesn’t matter otherwise.

      Crowdsourced disempowerment? Is there an implicit "yes"?

    11. The story’s charm disguises the invasion of privacy at its heart: the way technology is both eroding our personal boundaries and coercing us in deleterious ways.

      How true! I wonder how numbed we are to invasions of our privacy.

    1. she believed, was an effective way to make people think twice about being so bold with their racism.

      This does sound like a form of public shaming, to prevent an undesired behavior, but it could go so wrong. Like the prof from earlier in the article, but when there is no law citizens tend to take it into their own hands.

    2. Marla Wilson, 35, of San Francisco, said she was appalled when she saw white supremacists marching so brazenly in Charlottesville. Doxxing, she believed, was an effective way to make people think twice about being so bold with their racism.

      By actively participating in the march a person marching can be assumed to believe in what the marchers are promoting; a danger would be to dox a bystander who may be observing, or protesting the march.

    3. “For a long time it was only a certain quarter of people on the internet who would be willing to do this,” Ms. Coleman said. “It was very much hinged on certain geek cultures, but there was an extraordinary quality to the Charlottesville protest. It was such a strong public display I think it just opened the gates.”

      I think this to be true. For a while doxxing as they say wasn't something really heard of besides in the online game world. That quickly has changed and now we see doxxing going on in many forms. An example was in the last election when Wikileaks leaked out documents on certain candidates.

    4. The ethics — and even the definition — of doxxing is murky. It is the dissemination of often publicly available information. And, some at the protest asked, are you really doxxing a person if he or she is marching on a public street, face revealed and apparently proud? It is not as though they are hiding their identities.

      doxxing seems to be an act of black mailing done online by people who wish to be anonymous towards those they feel are there enemies however when it's done in person, its questionable if considered to be doxxing.

    5. “People went berserk,” Ms. Coleman said. “That, to me, was this interesting turning point where it showed the general public would be willing to jump into the fray.”Charlottesville has made doxxing even more commonplace.“For a long time it was only a certain quarter of people on the internet who would be willing to do this,” Ms. Coleman said. “It was very much hinged on certain geek cultures, but there was an extraordinary quality to the Charlottesville protest. It was such a strong public display I think it just opened the gates.”

      This level of engagement is clearly different from the beginning nature of doxxing revealing the identity of other hackers. The notion of the general public "jumping in the fray" creates a feeling of chaos and disregard of any private rights. If everyone does not respect privacy, I am afraid going out in any public setting is now opening up yourself to any and all forms of privacy-breaches.

    6. In short, once someone is labeled a Nazi on the internet, that person stays a Nazi on the internet.Internet vigilantism has a checkered history.

      One of the concerning aspects of Internet vigilantism is the nature of the internet being both ephemeral (due to the overwhelming amount of new, incoming information) and eternal (due to the nature of reaction and spread of information) simultaneously

    7. This level of engagement is clearly different from the beginning nature of doxxing revealing the identity of other hackers. The notion of the general public "jumping in the fray" creates a feeling of chaos and disregard of any private rights. If everyone does not respect privacy, I am afraid going out in any public setting is now opening up yourself to any and all forms of privacy-breaches.

    8. One of the concerning aspects of Internet vigilantism is the nature of the internet being both ephemeral (due to the overwhelming amount of new, incoming information) and eternal (due to the nature of reaction and spread of information) simultaneously

    9. “Some of what is happening now will make these white supremacists realize why their grandparents wore hoods,” Ms. Wilson said. “At least then there was shame.”

      Interesting logic. If these current protesters aren't bothered by their identities being known then clearly other things are at play and approaches other than vigilantism seem would be more constructive.

    10. But Tony McAleer, a former white supremacist leader who now runs Life After Hate, a rehabilitation program for neo-Nazis, called doxxing a “ passive aggressive violence.”

      I would agree that this kind of activity is passive aggressive and is different than revealing someone's previously chosen hidden identity.

  3. Jun 2019
    1. lways, always hover, and see what they are verified for.

      whoa, quick and easy trick! I'll definitely use it.

    2. Now imagine a world where checking your mirrors before switching lanes was rare, three standard-deviations-out behavior. What would the roads look like?

      what would the roads of the modern web look like if folks did regularly do this, on Facebook for instance?

    3. You can absolutely do this every time before you share. And given it is so easy, it’s irresponsible not to.

      They are advocating a behavior change that should restrict passing on erroneous information. I would like to make an analogy here but think it may be inappropriate in this context.

    4. It’s not enough to check the stuff that is suspicious: if you apply your investigations selectively, you’ve already lost the battle.

      Even if it isnt suspicious you should check it either way. You cant just fact check those that you believe may be false but rather all.

    5. the only viable literacy solution to web misinformation involves always checking any information in your stream that you find interesting, emotion-producing, or shareable.

      I agree that always checking information, which you find shareable or emotion-producing will help you in your online research.

    6. (Here’s a short rant of mine from 2009

      I checked this website he shared. Future plan in my future classes: re-teach students about the web education when they write their research paper.

    7. Scan the stories. If you want to be hypervigilant, scan for sources you recognize, and consider sharing one of the stories featuring original reporting instead of the tweet.

      You know a lot, don't doubt your knowledge, you know a lot of good and valid sources, use your brain. Check the receipts!

    8. But I end up coming back to this simple stuff because I can’t shake the feeling that digital literacy needs to start with the mirror and head-checks before it gets to automotive repair or controlled skids. Because it is these simple behaviors, applied as habits and enforced as norms, that have the power to change the web as we know it, to break our cycle of reaction and recognition, and ultimately to get even our deeper investigations off to a better start.

      After reading the article, I realized that it is extremely simple to check some of the things online that we are consuming, especially when we spend so much time on our devices. I haven't really checked what I was looking at or reading, except for school work, and I think that Caulfield has provided some easy ways for us to do so.

    9. Go up to the “omnibar” Strip off everything after the domain name, type wikipedia and press enter This generates a Google search for that URL with the Wikipedia page at the top Click that link, then check in the sidebar that the URL matches. Forty-nine out of fifty times it will. The fiftieth time you may have some work to do.

      Every tip is helpful, easy and doable. His article opened my eyes to all sorts of things I didn't know or was aware of.

    10. One of the things I’ve been trying to convince people for the past year and a half is that the only viable literacy solution to web misinformation involves always checking any information in your stream that you find interesting, emotion-producing, or shareable.

      I've seen too many facebook posts, and instagram stories with emotion provoking images and some false fact (usually heavy topics, including Roe) Then people go on to like that post or share it themselves.. so that completely false fact that shocks or disgusts people goes on to live another day. Have to check

    11. Your methods of checking have to be really quick. They have to be habitual, automatic. They can’t be cognitively expensive.

      I learned a lot from Mike Caulfield's blog on authenticating URLs. I love that he stresses to be quick- I tend to waste a lot of time and get easily off topic while searching the web

    12. When a story is truly breaking, this is what it looks like. Our technique here is simple. Select some relevant text. Right-click or Cmd-click to search Google When you get to Google don’t stop, click the “News” tab to get a more curated feed Read and scan. Investigate more as necessary.

      This is very useful information, as I am new to Twitter and appreciate this valuable tool to check the validity of the posts.

    13. Go up to the “omnibar” Strip off everything after the domain name, type wikipedia and press enter This generates a Google search for that URL with the Wikipedia page at the top Click that link, then check in the sidebar that the URL matches.

      Nice trick. I'll have to remember to try that. Kind of reminds of how I do a search on Yahoo to see how my internet security software rates a site's 'trustworthiness', thereby avoiding site's that might infect my computer.

    14. But I end up coming back to this simple stuff because I can’t shake the feeling that digital literacy needs to start with the mirror and head-checks before it gets to automotive repair or controlled skids. Because it is these simple behaviors, applied as habits and enforced as norms, that have the power to change the web as we know it, to break our cycle of reaction and recognition, and ultimately to get even our deeper investigations off to a better start.

      First off i want to say what a great article, i really enjoyed reading it. I chose this quote because it pretty much sums up the article. It also explains a lot of what is already going on the media and ways we can improve. It's so true. If a lot more people would stop to look up if the information they heard or read about were true, then there would be so much less fake news. It's important to not be so quick to believe everything that is online.

    15. There are some hard problems with misinformation on the web. But for the average user, a lot of what goes wrong comes down to failure to follow simple and quick processes of verification and contextualization. Not after you start thinking, but before you do.

      This quote is right that people should always check before we start to use the information. In my opinion, I think people should form good habits to check, because it is good safeguard to use the right information, and people should stop to spread and stop to use the wrong information.

    1. white supremacists and right-wing violence are the biggest domestic terror threat but also admitted that federal agencies aren’t really doing anything about it.
    2. To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America.

      There aren't any words for this! Utterly absurd and wrong. The terror that people in this country experience from hate crimes isn't different from international terrorism. It's criminal to be allowed.

    3. When it comes to any form of resistance or fight for equality, America will always paint black people as terrorists.

      Its quite sad to say that people believe or may even agree to this.

    4. The subcommittee noted that there was a 17 percent increase in reported hate crimes in 2017 from the previous year and a 31 percent increase since 2014. And in spite of the ADL’s report that white supremacists were responsible for 78 percent of extremist murders in 2018, the FBI still dedicates most of its time, money and manpower to investigating and stopping international terrorism.

      This is sad, I feel like the hate crime increased so much more in the past 4years. Now that is influenced more by the president I think that it'll be harder to bring these numbers down. We should all be seen the same.

    5. were charged with hate crimes instead of domestic terrorism simply because “there’s no domestic terrorism charge.”

      I think that this was interesting because with the amount of time and effort that media and news outlets put into reporting and showing different shootings and acts of domestic terrorism, shouldn't there be some kind of punishment for that? It has happened enough that it is a social issue - we made it a social issue - and there is a definition for "domestic terrorism" in accordance with the law. Or, as it points out further down in the article, have a specific devision to investigate domestic terrorism threats.

    6. But when it comes to white people’s stance on black protest, as the great poet and philosopher Montero Lamar Hill once said: “Can’t nobody tell me nothing.”

      This is an article that has some good points.. the interview, the statistics, with sadly some biased thrown in. Shouldn't be an us against them mentality on either side.

    7. But when it comes to white people’s stance on black protest, as the great poet and philosopher Montero Lamar Hill once said: “Can’t nobody tell me nothing.”

      In my opinion, I think everyone has the same equal right in the world. However, according to the history, there are so many events present the white threat to the black. People should stop being that way, and we are supposed to stick together.

    1. n a separate statement to Al Jazeera’s “The Stream” on Wednesday, Renee Bach said “these allegations that over 1,000 children died is absolute lies and allegations. I can’t rule out the fact that children died, like they do die at any health facility, but it’s still not true to say I killed them.”

      Was unable to find any other information on the news when I tried to right click and find news item on google I found this article interesting because there really is no proof as they say and they comment on its allegations. there was not much on what authorities plan to do to this person mainly because they show no proof.

    1. The FBI said it has stopped using the "Black Identity Extremist" tag and acknowledged that white supremacist violence is the biggest terrorist threat this country faces.

      I am not surprised when the article stated, that white supremacist violence is the biggest terrorist threat that this country faces.

    2. black people specifically are 500 times more likely to die this way (Xu, Murphy, Kochanek, & Bastian, 2016).

      When someone mentions statistic data with work cited source in the parenthesis, it makes the info credible. I checked the source using Caulfield's method and found the article but couldn't find the number "500". I need to dig deeper.

    1. The Anti-Defamation League released its annual report, “Murder and Extremism in the United States 2018,” on Wednesday, which tracked murders perpetrated by all types of domestic extremists over the past year. According to their research, right-wing extremists killed more Americans in 2018 than they have in any year since 1995. The 50 extremist-related murders also made last year the fourth-deadliest year since 1970.The murders were overwhelmingly linked to white Americans. Only three deaths (or 6 percent of the extremist-related murders in 2018) were perpetrated by a black person.

      This is a shocking and very sad statistic. This article will change the way I read current event news regarding terrorism. Note: I checked the validity of these sources (The Root and ADL) using Caufield's Wikipedia technique and both checked out.

    1. According to the official, a significant issue that the bureau faces is that the federal criminal code has made it more challenging to bring charges against domestic terror suspects than in cases involving international terrorism or foreign terrorist organizations.

      i think that if a group individuals are going to be punished for doing something wrong such as acts of violence, those groups should all be punished the same way, no matter what the race is or where they come from.

    1. First there’s the Twitter bio and the headshot. The headshot is an original photo — a reverse image search here doesn’t turn up Maisy, but it doesn’t turn up anyone else — it’s less likely to be a stolen photo.

      This is interesting.

    1. This belief system, which I have come to think of as “educationism,” is grounded in a familiar story about cause and effect: Once upon a time, America created a public-education system that was the envy of the modern world. No nation produced more or better-educated high-school and college graduates, and thus the great American middle class was built.

      Look for additional uses of educationism.

  4. Jan 2019
    1. Knowing how to read, write, and participate in the digital world has become the 4th basic foundational skill next to the three Rs—reading, writing, and arithmetic—in a rapidly evolving, networked world.

      Technology is our future and our students should be fluent in the digital world

    2. reach and meet the growing number of diverse audiences using the web

      Important to focus on diverse audiences globally.