Teens junk food information diet generates concerns
Part I
How worried should we be about an ignorant younger generation fattened up on propaganda, marketing pap, social media hype, and influencer-peddled information junk food?

On one hand, the 13 young journalists who participated in the East-West Center Summer Journalism Camp last month in Honolulu left me encouraged. These teens were analytical, critical thinkers who justifiably approach the news they consume with caution and skepticism. As young journalists themselves, they understand the difference between some bloviating influencer on YouTube and actual news.

Sadly, according to a recent alarming study that details how, where, and from whom teens get the information they consume, these teenage journalists may be the exception rather than the rule. 

One cause for alarm is where teens get their news. According to a Media Insight Project study, a whopping 81% of teens get their news from influencers or independent creators “at least sometimes.” (Overall, 57%  of American teens and adults get news from influencers or independent creators at least sometimes.) The study shows that 57% of teens get news daily from Social Media, in contrast to 30-36% for adults 35 and older. Teens get more news from Social Media than any other source.

This is a problem of course because much of the information spewed by influencers and digital content creators on social media is often uninformed and unverified—the very antithesis of credible news produced by journalists. A UNESCO study shows that 62% of digital content creators don’t fact check. “The survey uncovered trends in how creators assess information credibility including 42% who use social media metrics like likes and shares as primary credibility markers, while 21% of respondents share content based solely on trust in friends who shared it,” according to the study. 

It's even worse for fitness influencers. A study shows that less than 3% of fitness posts were supported by a valid scientific information, with advice instead being driven by personal opinions or commercial/brand sponsorships. 

Not only is the information teens primarily rely on of poor quality, it’s being delivered by unqualified self-promoters and entertainers rather than subject matter experts. Studies have shown that content creators usually lack professional credentials or qualifications in their respective fields, and instead draw followers based on their looks or charisma. For example, a Pew Research study showed that while 41% of health influencers claim some form of health care experience, yet only 17% hold traditional medical credentials, such as being a doctor, nurse, or other certified health care professional. The same holds true for fitness influencers, less than 20% of whom have professional qualifications or credentials.

When it comes to what kinds of information teens consume, the news doesn’t get any better. We’ll look at that aspect of the issue in part two of this report, and discuss how we might help teens improve their information diet.

Media report Iran war's inconvenient (and ugly) truths
The Iran war news carousel seems to be twirling around endlessly, spinning the same stale tales of Trump's threats, peace proposals bearing fruit "very soon," and death and destruction. However, if one looks close enough, there are examples of coverage that is more consistent with the principles of peace journalism. 

Iran News Carousel (AI generated image)

This counternarrative coverage eschews elite, military dominated, blow-by-blow storytelling about tactical military strikes, and instead looks to spotlight victims and the marginalized with reporting that moves beyond mere statistics to provide context and a glimpse into the humanitarian crisis fueled by this war.

For example, Democracy Now has broken out of the military-dominated narrative and instead reported extensively on Iranian civilian deaths while exposing the military's claims that civilians aren't being harmed. The New York Times has done the same, famously breaking down US culpability in the case of the destroyed girls school and the recent US bombing of a residential area.

PBS has provided exemplary coverage on the destruction of cultural sites, as well as the war’s impact on the daily lives of Iranians. The Guardian has also written a moving profile of daily life in Tehran amidst the war. 

Both the Guardian and BBC have highlighted the war’s devastating impact on medical care and medical facilities in Iran. 

The AP has gone one step further, and spotlighted how the Iran war has disrupted daily life around the globe (the Philippines, US, Nigeria, Nepal, Chile, Turkey, and Italy). These disruptions include high gas prices squeezing family budgets New York and how a print shop in Nigeria can’t operate because the fuel to run their generator is now too expensive.

It's encouraging to see this kind of exemplary reporting that shatters bogus administration claims about the war, its justification, and its terrible consequences. Peace journalism has always been predicated on the notion that journalism impacts citizens and societies, either positively or negatively. I think it’s clear that fact based coverage about the Iran war has naturally led to an informed public that, understandably, disapprove of the war (only 35% approve, according to Reuters). If the US is ever to extricate itself from this quagmire, the media need to keep reporting the war’s inconvenient truths, which in turn will maintain the political pressure to bring this debacle to a swift conclusion.

 

HNN's Annalisa Burgos (right) gives the campers a studio tour.

Young journalists learn PJ; produce great newspaper, videos
It’s not often I actually feel my advanced age. But try keeping up with 13 energetic, enthusiastic teenagers, and you’ll feel the burn, too. By the time our Summer Journalism Camp for high school students ended on Thursday, I was physically and intellectually spent, a 1961 Edsel out of gas abandoned by the side of the road, a wisp of steam wafting skyward from under the hood.

It was all for a good cause. The East-West Center (EWC) hosted the high school journalists from Oahu public and private schools in Hawaii’s first summer camp for young journalists. The camp went great. The students were effusive in their praise for the four day event, noting how the camp’s impactful presentations and hands-on activities prepared them for the upcoming school year and beyond.

Among my presentations, of course, was a discussion about peace journalism. I’ve given dozens of PJ seminars and lectures to college students and professional journalists, but never to high schoolers. As I created my lecture, it quickly became apparent how much PJ can apply in scholastic settings. Here is the advice I gave the students about applying PJ at their schools:

1. Give voice to the marginalized—Who are the invisible students at your school? What can you do to help them tell their stories, and bring them into the society at large?
2. Build bridges of understanding and common ground between different groups—freshmen and upperclassmen; athletes and others; different ethnic groups
3. Seek input from all groups when discussing/debating solutions
4. Tell stories that debunk myths like the lazy teen; the phone addicted teen; the teen who is disengaged from real world issues; the ADD teen; etc.
5. Not talking sides in policy debates; instead, insure all voices are heard
6. Dig deep to report about the causes of friction, conflict, and polarization (instead of just reporting the superficial conflict—a shouting match, a disagreement at a meeting, a boycott, etc.)
7. Tell stories that humanize, never using inflammatory, stereotyping language.

The Summer Camp newspaper

The young journalists also heard great advice from Cindy Reves, newspaper advisor at McKinley High School and camp co-director; Steve Rice, multimedia trainer; and professional journalists from Civil Beat (Thomas Heaton and Blaze Lovell) and Hawaii News Now (Annalisa Burgos), which hosted us for a visit last Wednesday. A lunch performance featuring EWC/UH students was also a highlight of the event.

The camp, sponsored by EWC and the Hawaii Scholastic Journalism Association, culminated with the students producing a 7-page newspaper and three news videos to accompany the articles. (QR codes embedded in the newspaper will lead you to the videos). The paper and videos are excellent, especially given the students’ relative inexperience and the truncated production time. 

The trainers were proud of the kids, their work ethic, and their intellectual curiosity. They were a delight to work with. (Delightful, but exhausting!) I hope this is only the first summer journalism camp at the EWC. It would be great next year if the camp brings in participants from the neighbor islands, too.

I look forward to seeing the outstanding journalism produced by these young journalists this school year.

Campers enjoy an intercultural performance on Tuesday.

 

Summer Camper Ava Zoto captures images at the 
East-West Center's Japanese Garden.

Young journalists flock to East-West Center
It's a big ask to expect a high school student to take four days out of their summer to do something academic. Yet, that's exactly what 14 high school journalists are doing this week as they attend the inaugural Summer High School Journalism Camp at the East-West Center.

Thomas Heaton (l) and Blaze Lovell from Civil
Beat discuss newswriting with the campers.

The camp kicked off yesterday with expert insights on news writing and reporting from Civil Beat reporters Blaze Lovell and Thomas Heaton, who discussed and broke down a complex story they did that investigated the problems with a dam here on Oahu that almost burst in March. 

The event continued with a session on multimedia recording from Professor Emeritus Steve Rice, followed by a hands-on activity where the students descended upon the East-West Center's Japanese Garden to shoot video and still photos. 

The camp continues today through Thursday. The students will be producing a seven page newspaper detailing the camp's activities, as well as several videos about the camp's sessions, including an intercultural lunch performance from EWC graduate students today and a field trip to Hawaii News Now tomorrow.

Stay tuned for a full wrap next week.

Camper Alex Ikeda and colleagues meet, 
greet, and organize.

Questions help explore whether info is news or nonsense
I’ve had some interesting discussion lately with a family member about something he perceives as big news, but which has not been reported by any traditional media outlets, notably none of the most trusted legacy sources. I have not said that his “news” is not true, only that is not verified.

Figuring out what is and isn’t news, and what is and isn’t reliable information, is an issue not just with my adult family member, but with society (and especially young people) writ large. A study called News Literacy in America: A survey of teen information attitudes, habits and skills (2024) found that:

• 

  News Literacy Project

  Nearly half of teens surveyed thought the press does more to harm democracy than to protect it.
• Eight in 10 teens surveyed reported seeing posts on social media that spread or promote conspiracy theories, and of those, 81% said they are inclined to believe one or more of them.
• Most teens struggled to distinguish between different types of information, such as news, advertisement, opinion and entertainment. (News Literacy Project)

How do we help teens, and my relative, make sense of the infosphere? The best way to address these issues is through rigorous training in media literacy, which I’ve taught in many different forms in many different places around the world. As I teach it, rule number one is to remove partisan considerations from the discussion. In lots of places, but especially the US, partisanship chokes off discussions like overgrown weeks in a drain pipe. I also strive to choke off conversations that use condescending labels like conspiracy theorist for people who believe and spread unverified information. As a media literacy trainer, the worst thing you can tell someone is that they information that they believe is wrong, or that they are stupid for believing it. (In fact, my family member is smart and analytical). Instead, I give my trainees the tools to analyze information themselves, and come to their own conclusions as to whether the information they believe is genuine or not.

These media literacy tools are crowned by a list of questions one can employ to analyze information. These questions include:

--What person or entity created or shared the information? What is their expertise? Do they have first-hand knowledge of the news, or is their knowledge merely hearsay? (Hearsay, as we know, is inadmissible in court!)

--Why did they create it or share it?

--How do the creators benefit from disseminating the message? (The benefit could be financial, political, social, etc.)

--Who does the message harm (Political enemies? Business competitors?)

--Who is the target audience of the information?

--How does the story or information grab the audience’s attention? (If the attention grabber is emotional rather than logical, that’s a red flag for misinformation).

--What points of view are shown? Have those who dispute the information being given space to share their dissent, or is the information presented with only one side given?

--Are salient facts are omitted, or distorted?

--How does the way the information is presented (framed) change the meaning of the information? Is there context? (How do omitted or distorted facts and a one-sided presentation change how the information is perceived by the target audience?)

--Where is the hard evidence? This includes first-hand testimony (not “I’ve heard” or “I’ve been told”) and documentation, especially financial documentation.

--Is the information verified by multiple sources? Most journalism outlets use the three source rule. One source is not sufficient, especially when there is no trail of documentation to support the information this source is presenting.

--Is the information outdated? Is this an old story simply repackaged?

There are more, but these are a good start. Yes, it’s impractical to do this kind of analysis with all the information we consume. Still, being aware and skeptical, thinking about the right questions to ask, and diversifying ones’ news sources can go a long way to clear out the weeds clogging our civil discourse.