# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
No, it isn't fake news: Covid permitting, there will be an exhibition on Fake News running from 27 May 2021 to January 2022 at the Fondation EDF in Paris. Designed for school groups as well as the general public, it will be a great opportunity to have your pupils develop their critical-thinking skills.

The exhibition is subtitled "Art, fiction, lies", and many of the exhibits are artworks by artists trying to encourage observers to think about the news they consume, and the way they consume it.

A first step can be to consider with pupils the term "fake news", which has become so widespread that it covers a whole range of material. As American researcher Claire Wardle entitled a 2017 article: "Fake News. It's complicated." It runs the gamut from misinformation (mistaken, not intentionally manipulative) to disinformation (deliberately created to fool people) but can also include satire and parody, which are often taken out of context. This infographic accompanied her article, showing degrees of fakeness.

The exhibition isn't specifically designed for English classes, but quite a number of the exhibits are from the English-speaking world or don't contain specific language content.

For example, the American duo of artists the Yes Men, Andy Bichlbaum and Mike Bonanno, who printed and distributed a fake edition of The New York Times in 2008, dated several months later, and only containing good news that they hoped would happen, like the end of the war in Iraq. Pupils could discuss whether they think fake news produced with a positive intention can be considered differently from fakes that intend to deceive? Can they come up with their own hopeful good news stories?

British artist "Bill Posters" and American artist Daniel Howe create " deep-fake" videos of people like Mark Zuckerberg and Kim Kardashian to make us question what well-known personalities and institutions are saying.

Again pupils can discuss if there is a difference between this and deep-fake videos designed to discredit a political opponent for example.

The Power of ImagesA number of works in the exhibition look at how images can be used to give false impressions. We tend to take images, particularly photos and film, at face value, assuming that they represent "the truth", without imagining what might be just outside the frame.

On the other hand, press cartoons use visual shortcuts to make us think. This image by Russian cartoonist Mikhail Zlatkovsky is entitled "Empty News". Pupils can find all sorts of reasons for the missing stories: Censorship? Self-censorship? The stories that are ignored because they won't make money?

Singaporean cartoonist Kevin Lau has created a series of images about the power social media has claimed over our lives, including this one, simply titled "Trapped".

Teaching about Media
The exhibition creators invited the CLEMI(Centre pour l'Éducation aux Médias et à l'Information) to create a very detailed free teaching pack to go with the exhibition. You can download it from the CLEMI site.

Fake News: Art, fiction, mensonge
27 May 2021 to January 2022
Free, but reservation required
Group reservations:
resafondationedf@lpcvm.fr
06 24 06 57 59

Notion(s) culturelle(s) : "Éducation aux médias"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
No, it isn't fake news: Covid permitting, there will be an exhibition on Fake News running from 27 May 2021 to January 2022 at the Fondation EDF in Paris. Designed for school groups as well as the general public, it will be a great opportunity to have your pupils develop their critical-thinking skills.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article is available also in Deutsch, Español, Français and العربية

By now we've all agreed the term "fake news" is unhelpful, but without an alternative, we're left awkwardly using air quotes whenever we utter the phrase. The reason we're struggling with a replacement is because this is about more than news, it's about the entire information ecosystem. And the term fake doesn't begin to describe the complexity of the different types of misinformation (the inadvertent sharing of false information) and disinformation (the deliberate creation and sharing of information known to be false).

To understand the current information ecosystem, we need to break down three elements:

1. The different types of content that are being created and shared

2. The motivations of those who create this content

3. The ways this content is being disseminated

This matters. As Danah Boyd outlined in a recent piece, we are at war. An information war. We certainly should worry about people (including journalists) unwittingly sharing misinformation, but far more concerning are the systematic disinformation campaigns. Previous attempts to influence public opinion relied on 'one-to-many' broadcast technologies but, social networks allow 'atoms' of propaganda to be directly targeted at users who are more likely to accept and share a particular message. Once they inadvertently share a misleading or fabricated article, image, video or meme, the next person who sees it in their social feed probably trusts the original poster, and goes on to share it themselves. These 'atoms' then rocket through the information ecosystem at high speed powered by trusted peer-to-peer networks.

This is far more worrying than fake news sites created by profit driven Macedonian teenagers.

The Different Types of Mis and Disinformation

Back in November, I wrote about the different types of problematic information I saw circulate during the US election. Since then, I've been trying to refine a typology (and thank you to Global Voices for helping me to develop my definitions even further). I would argue there are seven distinct types of problematic content that sit within our information ecosystem. They sit on a scale, one that loosely measures the intent to deceive.

Why is this type of content being created?

If we're serious about developing solutions to these problems, we also need to think about who is creating these different types of content and why it is being created.

I saw Eliot Higgins present in Paris in early January, and he listed four 'Ps' which helped explain the different motivations. I've been thinking about these a great deal and using Eliot's original list have identified four additional motivations for the creation of this type of content: Poor Journalism, Parody, to Provoke or 'Punk', Passion, Partisanship, Profit, Political Influence or Power, and Propaganda.

This is a work in progress but once you start breaking these categories down and mapping them against one another you begin to see distinct patterns in terms of the types of content created for specific purposes.

Dissemination Mechanisms

Finally, we need to think about how this content is being disseminated. Some of it is being shared unwittingly by people on social media, clicking retweet without checking. Some of it is being amplified by journalists who are now under more pressure than ever to try and make sense and accurately report information emerging on the social web in real time. Some of it is being pushed out by loosely connected groups who are deliberately attempting to influence public opinion, and some of it is being disseminated as part of sophisticated disinformation campaigns, through bot networks and troll factories. (As you can see I need to work up a 3D matrix to map my graph against the different dissemination mechanisms).

As this Buzzfeed article highlights, a group of US Trump supporting teenagers have connected online to influence the French election in April. They have shared folders of sharable 'meme-shells' so even those who can't speak French can drop visuals into hashtag streams. It's now incredibly easy for loosely connected groups to mobilize, using free tools to co-ordinate private messaging.

When messaging is co-ordinated and consistent, it easily fools our brains, already exhausted and increasingly reliant on heuristics (simple psychological shortcuts) due to the overwhelming amount of information flashing before our eyes every day. When we see multiple messages about the same topic, our brains use that as a short-cut to credibility. It must be true we say - I've seen that same claim several times today.

On the night of the Inauguration attendees at the Deploraball boasted to This American Life they "memed" Trump into the White House. Listen to an excerpt.

They understand that we're much less likely to be critical of visuals. We're much less likely to be critical of information that supports our existing beliefs. And, as information overload exhausts our brains, we're much easier to influence.

What can we do?

We all play a crucial part in this ecosystem. Every time we passively accept information without double-checking, or share a post, image or video before we've verified it, we're adding to the noise and confusion. The ecosystem is now so polluted, we have to take responsibility for independently checking what we see online.

In the weeks after the US election, we saw journalists track down fake news creators. One consistent element was that creators talked about trying to create news that would fool people on the Left and how they failed. As fake news creator Jestin Coler told NPR, "We've tried to do similar things to liberals. It just has never worked, it never takes off. You'll get debunked within the first two comments and then the whole thing just kind of fizzles out."

But liberal debunking primacy was short lived. Since Trump's inauguration, we're seeing both sides falling for and sharing false information.Whether it's the 'rogue' Twitter accounts that no one has been able to independently verify, the Trump executive order meme generator, users re-tweeting a post by Jill Stein's parody account desperately wanting it to be real, or claiming Vice-President Pence has deleted a tweet condemning the Muslim ban when it was still sitting on his timeline from December, the Left is showing that it is just as human as the Right. When humans are angry and fearful, their critical thinking skills diminish.

Craig Silverman was a guest on the "On The Media" radio show and talked about the need for emotional skepticism. I couldn't agree more. This isn't just about funding more news literacy projects, this is about teaching people to second guess their instinctual reactions. If you find yourself incredibly angry at a piece of content or feeling smug (because your viewpoint has been reaffirmed), take another look.

In the same way that you're told to wait 20 minutes before you reach for a second helping of food, because you need to wait for your brain to catch up with your stomach, the same is true with information. Maybe you don't need to wait 20 minutes before clicking the share button, but two minutes is probably sensible.

This is a crucial time. If we're going to truly understand the situation we find ourselves in, we need to understand the severity and we need to understand what we're fighting. Throwing the term fake news around, even with air quotes, is getting us nowhere.

If you are interested in this topic. I have created an ongoing reading list.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article is available also in Deutsch, Español, Français and العربية By now we've all agreed the term "fake news" is unhelpful, but without an alternative, we're left awkwardly using air quotes whenever we utter the phrase. The reason we're struggling with a replacement is because this is about more than news, it's about the entire information ecosystem.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fake news is nothing new. But bogus stories can reach more people more quickly via social media than what good old-fashioned viral emails could accomplish in years past.

Concern about the phenomenon led Facebook and Google to announce that they'll crack down on fake news sites, restricting their ability to garner ad revenue. Perhaps that could dissipate the amount of malarkey online, though news consumers themselves are the best defense against the spread of misinformation.

Not all of the misinformation being passed along online is complete fiction, though some of it is. Snopes.com has been exposing false viral claims since the mid 1990s, whether that's fabricated messages, distortions containing bits of truth and everything in between. Founder David Mikkelson warned in a Nov. 17 article not to lump everything into the "fake news" category. "The fictions and fabrications that comprise fake news are but a subset of the larger bad news phenomenon, which also encompasses many forms of shoddy, unresearched, error-filled, and deliberately misleading reporting that do a disservice to everyone," he wrote.

A lot of these viral claims aren't "news" at all, but fiction, satire and efforts to fool readers into thinking they're for real.

We've long encouraged readers to be skeptical of viral claims, and make good use of the delete key when a chain email hits their inboxes. In December 2007, we launched our Ask FactCheck feature, where we answer readers' questions, the vast majority of which concern viral emails, social media memes and the like. Our first story was about a made-up email that claimed then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wanted to put a "windfall" tax on all stock profits of 100 percent and give the money to, the email claimed, "the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed minorities." We called it "a malicious fabrication" - that's "fake news" in today's parlance.

In 2008, we tried to get readers to rid their inboxes of this kind of garbage. We described a list of red flags - we called them Key Characteristics of Bogusness - that were clear tip-offs that a chain email wasn't legitimate. Among them: an anonymous author; excessive exclamation points, capital letters and misspellings; entreaties that "This is NOT a hoax!"; and links to sourcing that does not support or completely contradicts the claims being made.

Those all still hold true, but fake stories - as in, completely made-up "news" - have grown more sophisticated, often presented on a site designed to look (sort of) like a legitimate news organization. Still, we find it's easy to figure out what's real and what's imaginary if you're armed with some critical thinking and fact-checking tools of the trade.

Here's our advice on how to spot a fake:

Consider the source. In recent months, we've fact-checked fake news from abcnews.com.co (not the actual URL for ABC News), WTOE 5 News (whose "about" page says it's "a fantasy news website"), and the Boston Tribune (whose "contact us" page lists only a gmail address). Earlier this year, we debunked the claim that the Obamas were buying a vacation home in Dubai, a made-up missive that came from WhatDoesItMean.com, which describes itself as "One Of The Top Ranked Websites In The World for New World Order, Conspiracy Theories and Alternative News" and further says on its site that most of what it publishes is fiction.

Clearly, some of these sites do provide a "fantasy news" or satire warning, like WTOE 5, which published the bogus headline, "Pope Francis Shocks World, Endorses Donald Trump for President, Releases Statement." Others aren't so upfront, like the Boston Tribune, which doesn't provide any information on its mission, staff members or physical location - further signs that maybe this site isn't a legitimate news organization. The site, in fact, changed its name from Associated Media Coverage, after its work had been debunked by fact-checking organizations.

Snopes.com, which has been writing about viral claims and online rumors since the mid-1990s, maintains a list of known fake news websites, several of which have emerged in the past two years.

Read beyond the headline. If a provocative headline drew your attention, read a little further before you decide to pass along the shocking information. Even in legitimate news stories, the headline doesn't always tell the whole story. But fake news, particularly efforts to be satirical, can include several revealing signs in the text. That abcnews.com.co story that we checked, headlined "Obama Signs Executive Order Banning The Pledge Of Allegiance In Schools Nationwide," went on to quote "Fappy the Anti-Masturbation Dolphin." We have to assume that the many readers who asked us whether this viral rumor was true hadn't read the full story.

Check the author. Another tell-tale sign of a fake story is often the byline. The pledge of allegiance story on abcnews.com.co was supposedly written by "Jimmy Rustling." Who is he? Well, his author page claims he is a "doctor" who won "fourteen Peabody awards and a handful of Pulitzer Prizes." Pretty impressive, if true. But it's not. No one by the name of "Rustling" has won a Pulitzer or Peabody award. The photo accompanying Rustling's bio is also displayed on another bogus story on a different site, but this time under the byline " Darius Rubics." The Dubai story was written by "Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers." The Pope Francis story has no byline at all.

What's the support? Many times these bogus stories will cite official - or official-sounding - sources, but once you look into it, the source doesn't back up the claim. For instance, the Boston Tribune site wrongly claimed that President Obama's mother-in-law was going to get a lifetime government pension for having babysat her granddaughters in the White House, citing "the Civil Service Retirement Act" and providing a link. But the link to a government benefits website doesn't support the claim at all.

The banning-the-pledge story cites the number of an actual executive order - you can look it up. It doesn't have anything to do with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Another viral claim we checked a year ago was a graphic purporting to show crime statistics on the percentage of whites killed by blacks and other murder statistics by race. Then-presidential candidate Donald Trump retweeted it, telling Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly that it came "from sources that are very credible." But almost every figure in the image was wrong - FBI crime data is publicly available - and the supposed source given for the data, "Crime Statistics Bureau - San Francisco," doesn't exist.

Recently, we've received several questions about a fake news story on the admittedly satirical site Nevada County Scooper, which wrote that Vice President-elect Mike Pence, in a "surprise announcement," credited gay conversion therapy for saving his marriage. Clearly such a "surprise announcement" would garner media coverage beyond a website you've never heard of. In fact, if you Google this, the first link that comes up is a Snopes.com article revealing that this is fake news.

Check the date. Some false stories aren't completely fake, but rather distortions of real events. These mendacious claims can take a legitimate news story and twist what it says - or even claim that something that happened long ago is related to current events.

Since Trump was elected president, we've received many inquiries from readers wanting to know whether Ford had moved car production from Mexico to Ohio, because of Trump's election. Readers cited various blog items that quoted from and linked to a CNN Money article titled " Ford shifts truck production from Mexico to Ohio." But that story is from August 2015, clearly not evidence of Ford making any move due to the outcome of the election. (A reminder again to check the support for these claims.)

One deceptive website didn't credit CNN, but instead took CNN's 2015 story and slapped a new headline and publication date on it, claiming, "Since Donald Trump Won The Presidency... Ford Shifts Truck Production From Mexico To Ohio." Not only is that a bogus headline, but the deception involves copyright infringement.

If this Ford story sounds familiar, that's because the CNN article has been distorted before.

In October 2015, Trump wrongly boasted that Ford had changed its plans to build new plants in Mexico, and instead would build a plant in Ohio. Trump took credit for Ford's alleged change of heart and tweeted a link to a story on a blog called Prntly.com, which cited the CNN Money story. But Ford hadn't changed its plans at all, and Trump deserved no credit.

In fact, the CNN article was about the transfer of some pickup assembly work from Mexico to Ohio, a move that was announced by Ford in March 2014. The plans for new plants in Mexico were still on, Ford said. "Ford has not spoken with Mr. Trump, nor have we made any changes to our plans," Ford said in a statement.

Is this some kind of joke? Remember, there is such thing as satire. Normally, it's clearly labeled as such, and sometimes it's even funny. Andy Borowitz has been writing a satirical news column, the Borowitz Report, since 2001, and it has appeared in the New Yorker since 2012. But not everyone gets the jokes. We've fielded several questions on whether Borowitz's work is true.

Among the headlines our readers have flagged: " Putin Appears with Trump in Flurry of Swing-State Rallies" and " Trump Threatens to Skip Remaining Debates If Hillary Is There." When we told readers these were satirical columns, some indicated that they suspected the details were far-fetched but wanted to be sure.

And then there's the more debatable forms of satire, designed to pull one over on the reader. That "Fappy the Anti-Masturbation Dolphin" story? That's the work of online hoaxer Paul Horner, whose "greatest coup," as described by the Washington Post in 2014, was when Fox News mentioned, as fact, a fake piece titled, "Obama uses own money to open Muslim museum amid government shutdown." Horner told the Post after the election that he was concerned his hoaxes aimed at Trump supporters may have helped the campaign.

The posts by Horner and others - whether termed satire or simply "fake news" - are designed to encourage clicks, and generate money for the creator through ad revenue. Horner told the Washington Post he makes a living off his posts. Asked why his material gets so many views, Horner responded, "They just keep passing stuff around. Nobody fact-checks anything anymore."

Check your biases. We know this is difficult. Confirmation bias leads people to put more stock in information that confirms their beliefs and discount information that doesn't. But the next time you're automatically appalled at some Facebook post concerning, say, a politician you oppose, take a moment to check it out.

Try this simple test: What other stories have been posted to the "news" website that is the source of the story that just popped up in your Facebook feed? You may be predisposed to believe that Obama bought a house in Dubai, but how about a story on the same site that carries this headline: " Antarctica 'Guardians' Retaliate Against America With Massive New Zealand Earthquake." That, too, was written by the prolific "Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers."

We're encouraged by some of the responses we get from readers, who - like the ones uncertain of Borowitz's columns - express doubt in the outrageous, and just want to be sure their skepticism is justified. But we are equally discouraged when we see debunked claims gain new life.

We've seen the resurgence of a fake quote from Donald Trump since the election - a viral image that circulated last year claims Trump told People magazine in 1998: "If I were to run, I'd run as a Republican. They're the dumbest group of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could lie and they'd still eat it up. I bet my numbers would be terrific." We found no such quote in People's archives from 1998, or any other year. And a public relations representative for the magazine confirmed that. People' s Julie Farin told us in an email last year: "We combed through every Trump story in our archive. We couldn't find anything remotely like this quote -and no interview at all in 1998."

Comedian Amy Schumer may have contributed to the revival of this fake meme. She put it on Instagram, adding at the end of a lengthy message, "Yes this quote is fake but it doesn't matter."

Consult the experts. We know you're busy, and some of this debunking takes time. But we get paid to do this kind of work. Between FactCheck.org, Snopes.com, the Washington Post Fact Checker and PolitiFact.com, it's likely at least one has already fact-checked the latest viral claim to pop up in your news feed.

FactCheck.org was among a network of independent fact-checkers who signed an open letter to Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg suggesting that Facebook "start an open conversation on the principles that could underpin a more accurate news ecosystem on its News Feed." We hope that conversation happens, but news readers themselves remain the first line of defense against fake news.

On our Viral Spiral page, we list some of the claims we get asked about the most; all of our Ask FactChecks can be found here. And if you encounter a new claim you'd like us to investigate, email us at editor@factcheck.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fake news is nothing new. But bogus stories can reach more people more quickly via social media than what good old-fashioned viral emails could accomplish in years past.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our 2023 classroom visit dates:

Winter: 1 November - 23 December

Our teacher training workshops are available on request, year-round.

To request a classroom visit or a teacher training workshop, email info@lie-detectors.org .

Follow us on LinkedIn for regular updates on community happenings, our participation in policy discussions, journalist and teacher training workshops, media coverage and opportunities to participate in our work.

Lie Detectors is a Friend of eTwinning.

Journalists of the European Broadcasting Union will bring greater understanding of online information and the work of journalists to schools.

Read here >

We're terribly sad to share the news that our dear friend Willi Rütten , one of Lie Detectors' strongest supporters, has died after a short illness.

Read more >

Our Mission

Lie Detectors is an independent and award-winning media literacy organisation in Europe whose remit is to counter the corrosive effect of online disinformation and online polarisation on democracy.

To do this, Lie Detectors empowers young people and teachers to tell fact from fake online and understand how professional journalism works. Interactive training sessions for school and teacher-training communities are run by selected and trained journalists and enable young and old to fact-check online content, understand news media, make informed choices and resist peer pressure as they assemble their worldview.

Lie Detectors contributes its insights from its on-the-ground work into advisory processes in the fields of education and digital rights to facilitate long-term societal resilience to polarisation and disinformation online.

Practically,

We turn working journalists and selected media experts into active participants in the drive for news literacy, creating positive contact between journalists and children as well as teachers. As of June 2021 we are working across Europe with more than 250 professional journalists and media organisations.

We attune teachers in primary, middle and secondary schools to digital media risks, to the tools available to counter it, and to the benefits and relevance of further classroom discussion of a topic often relegated to IT lessons and after-school clubs.

We provide work sheets and create memorable classroom experiences and lasting awareness of children's own participation in social networks; to propel pupils into an ongoing conversation of news consumption and verifying news.

We provide teacher-training seminars and workshops internationally, both as a Friend of eTwinning and in other fora.

We provide a link between schools and the very best existing news-literacy and news-verification initiatives.

Working with alliances of like-minded organisations, we inform educational policy-making through continued public speaking in varied fora, advocating for the systematic uptake and inclusion of news literacy in the curricula of teacher-training colleges and classrooms across Europe, as urged by Unesco and OECD. As part of this remit, Lie Detectors co-wrote expert recommendations and teacher guidelines as a member of the 2021/2022 Expert Group on Digital Literacy, and was a member of the EU's 2018 High Level Group on Fake News, advising the European Commission on how to tackle the spread and socio-economic impact of disinformation.

We remain independent of any commercial or political funding.

Why it matters

LIE DETECTORS works to improve news literacy, increase awareness of misinformation and further the general public's understanding of the mainstream media industry. It promotes positive and non-political contact between young people and journalists. It does this by sending working journalists into schools to deliver interactive classroom sessions.

Fake news creates a confusing, frightening world for people of all ages, pressuring them into adopting views without understanding their intention. LIE DETECTORS is a non-profit that helps teenagers and pre-teens learn how to spot and resist the growing volume of manipulative media crowding their Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat accounts as they start to forge an independent world view. A proliferation of news and fake-news sources, distribution networks and social media - combined with a greater polarisation by mainstream press - make it increasingly hard to tell fact from fiction. Growing numbers of young people report being turned off politics because of a feeling of alienation in the face of misinformation.

LIE DETECTORS has no interest in telling young people what to think. It aims to empower them to base their choices on reliable information and be actively aware of bias and persuasion. Children worldwide are taught not to accept sweets from strangers. As they consume more media, they need news literacy to do so wisely.

How we do it

LIE DETECTORS deploys journalists and selected media experts to teach classroom sessions, recruiting them primarily from alumni circles of recognised journalism schools. The project operates in Austria, Belgium and Germany, with more countries to follow. Classroom sessions are free of charge.

Professional journalists and media experts teach the 90-minute sessions in the presence of a teacher, offering follow-up material where desired. Sessions include an overview of fake news, methods of testing for misinformation, and analysis of drivers of the fake-news phenomenon. Interactive sections - designed to suit the relevant age group - help children understand how mainstream media selects news and may insert bias to present a picture of reality that is often incomplete. Material for homework or follow-up sessions - where requested - allows children to develop deeper a understanding of selective storytelling and perspective. All services offered to classrooms are free of charge and aim to reach a broad and diverse range of schools in Europe.

LIE DETECTORS has experienced intense interest in its pilot program from schools, journalists, potential funders and policymakers. As of December 2019, it has

designed and tested classroom sessions lasting 90 minutes for target age groups and collected feedback from more than 8500 children and their teachers*;

successfully transferred the sessions from Belgium (French and English-speaking classrooms) to Germany and Austria (German-speaking classrooms);

trained and enrolled 200 journalists for classroom visits;

introduced the project to lawmakers, politicians, journalists, teachers and the general public at closed-door and public events with audiences ranging from 50 to 15,000 in Germany, Belgium, Bosnia&Herzegovina and Denmark among others. LIE DETECTORS has presented its concept to an audience of 15,000 at the Leipzig Festival of Light, which commemorates the German city's role in ending communism.

won the European Commission's 2018 EU Digital skills award for its work in education. The awards are granted to recognise initiatives that have improved the digital skills of Europeans at school, at work, for ICT specialists, for girls and women and in society in general.

At its inception, the work of LIE DETECTORS work is aimed predominantly but not exclusively at school-aged children and their teachers, with a view to increasing general interest in and access to news literacy programs in Europe. LIE DETECTORS is currently active in Belgium, Germany and Austria. It will expand operations in these countries and pursue partnerships with relevant collaborating bodies to expand its program to other European countries. Countries currently being considered include the Netherlands and Poland.

LIE DETECTORS is a member of the European Commission's High Level Expert Group on Digital Disinformation and Fake News, a 39-member advisory body launched in 2018 with the goal of proposing lasting solutions to online disinformation. Its principal aim within this group is to boost critical media and news literacy across Europe and to advocate for media and information literacy to be both taught in teacher training colleges across Europe and to be adopted as a key gauge for school ratings such as the OECD's Pisa rankings.

LIE DETECTORS is non-political and its remit universal. It takes no funding from corporations including internet platforms. The success of LIE DETECTORS should be judged on the number of classrooms it reaches and its ability to operate across different countries, languages and cultures. It should be judged on the success of its aim to empower people to base choices on reliable information and be actively aware of bias and persuasion.

"It is good that I learn this now, and not later, because we are a lot on social media and then it is important to know this." Primary school student, Norwegian School, Waterloo, Belgium

MARIA OLGA GEORGOUSI

Administrative Trainee

Olga supports the Oprations team from the Brussels office. She has graduated as a translator from the Ionian University in Greece. Her master's studies mainly focused on intercultural and political communication, where she was able to study the vital role of critical thinking in tackling information both in the real and digital world. Previously, she was a trainee in the Directorate General of Translation of the European Commission.

JULIA BEBERNIK

Austrian Programme Assistant

Juliasupports the organisation and coordination of school visits and workshops from the office in Brussels. She holds a Master's degree in Management of Social and Health Organisations and worked previously in social NGOs in Germany and Chile. Her experiences in empowering children through education has driven her enthusiasm for the Lie Detectors mission.

LIES FERON

Head of Belgium Programme

Lies coordinates Lie Detectors' activities in Belgium. She is an accomplished project manager with over 25 years of experience in both public and private sectors, including science communication and press relations at Vrije Universiteit Brussel, advocacy for the European educational organisation effe, teaching and production assistance at various media, such as RTL-west, Deutsche Welle and ORF. She studied history and political sciences in Essen, and speaks Dutch, English, French and German.

JOCHEN SPANGENBERG

Media Expert & Senior Consultant, Berlin

Jochen coordinates research and cooperation projects for Germany's international public service broadcaster Deutsche Welle. His focus is on social newsgathering, verification of user-generated content and the use of eyewitness media for news reporting. He has a leading role in projects including REVEAL, InVID, Truly Media and WeVerify. Jochen also lectures at the Free University Berlin in Media & Communication Sciences. He is the author of the book The BBC in Transition and a number of papers, articles and book chapters. Previous to joining Deutsche Welle, Jochen was COO and Editor-in-Chief at a new media company and worked for BBC News & Current Affairs in radio and TV. Jochen supports Lie Detectors in its quest to bring media literacy into classrooms and raise awareness among young people on (news) media issues.

SVEN KNOBLOCH

Journalist and Network Coordinator for Lie Detectors in Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Thuringia

Based in Leipzig, Sven is a freelance TV reporter for German public broadcaster MDR and a contributor for ARD Aktuell and major German news programmes including Tagesschau and Tagesthemen. Sven is one of Lie Detectors' first participating journalists and has been visiting schools with Lie Detectors since 2018. Since 2020 he is responsible for networks of journalists and participating schools in Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia.

Experts
For a partial list of visiting journalists and media experts, click here.

LIE DETECTORS runs classroom sessions in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Luxembourg, Poland and Switzerland.

Teacher training workshops are available internationally on request, provided in-person and remotely.

Lie Detectors is a Friend of eTwinning.

Email info@lie-detectors.org for more information.

Beware of impostors on social media. Always contact us directly or via this contact page. We will never arrange classroom visits via Facebook or other social media.

CONTACT US

Email:
info@lie-detectors.org

Telephone:
+32 (0)2 329 00 23 - Lie Detectors Main Office
+43 660 929 77 87 - Austria Country Operations
+32 (0)2 329 00 23 - Belgium Country Operations
+49 (0)30 200741 - 08 - German Country Operations

Lie Detectors
Avenue des Arts 7/8

1210 Brussels
Belgium

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our 2023 classroom visit dates: Winter: 1 November - 23 December Our teacher training workshops are available on request, year-round. To request a classroom visit or a teacher training workshop, email info@lie-detectors.org . Follow us on LinkedIn for regular updates on community happenings, our participation in policy discussions, journalist and teacher training workshops, media coverage and opportunities to participate in our work.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Deep Voice' Software Can Clone Anyone's Voice With Just 3.7 Seconds of Audio

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Using snippets of voices, Baidu's 'Deep Voice' can generate new speech, accents, and tones.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Play the fake news game! How bad are you? Become a fake news tycoon and get as many followers as you can.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Le jeu en ligne Fake It To Make It repose sur un principe pour le moins original : créer et gérer des sites de fausses informations pour amasser de l'argent.

Plus un joueur génère de la peur, des conséquences dramatiques, mais malgré tout de la crédibilité, plus il gagne des dollars.

Il s'agit donc d'un jeu étonnamment simple et " lucratif ", mais également passionnant puisqu'il a enregistré plus de 90 000 sessions d'utilisateurs dans sa première année.

Sa créatrice, Amanda Warner, espère qu'il puisse jouer un rôle éducatif dans la lutte contre la désinformation en ligne.

" Le but du jeu est d'offrir aux internautes une meilleure compréhension de la façon dont les fausses informations sont créées, diffusées et modelées pour manipuler les émotions, de sorte qu'ils fassent preuve d'une plus grande prudence envers l'information à l'avenir ", indique la description du jeu.

Basée dans l'Ohio, Amanda Warner est conceptrice et développeuse de jeux qui comportent une dimension éducative. Elle s'intéresse à la désinformation depuis l'élection présidentielle de 2016 aux États-Unis.

" J'étais déprimée par la quantité de fausses informations qui circulaient avant les élections. Je voulais lancer un projet pour y remédier. "

Armée d'une vaste expérience dans la création de jeux et de programmes interactifs, elle a entrepris de mieux comprendre l'écosystème de la désinformation.

" J'ai étudié de nombreux sites de fausses informations pour me faire une idée. " Amanda Warner a également consulté les reportages sur le phénomène, comme l'enquête de BuzzFeed sur une usine à fausses informations en Macédoine.

Le jeu Fake It To Make It a attiré l'attention du monde de l'éducation. " J'ai reçu de la part des enseignants des commentaires très positifs, le jeu a provoqué d'excellentes discussions. "

S'il existe un environnement où le jeu Fake It To Make It et d'autres approches interactives de l'éducation au Web peuvent bénéficier d'un considérable impact, il s'agit bien des classes. Selon un rapport de l'Université de Stanford de 2016, " la capacité des jeunes à analyser l'information en ligne tient en un mot : faible ".

L'étude se penche sur le rapport de plus de 7 800 collégiens, lycéens et étudiants en universités aux États-Unis à la crédibilité de l'information en ligne dans différents contextes. Dans l'un des exercices, 40 % des élèves du secondaire ont fait confiance à une photo publiée sur un site de partage d'images sans s'interroger.

" Ils n'ont pas demandé d'où provenait l'image ", commente Sam Wineburg, professeur en sciences de l'éducation et en histoire à Stanford, principal auteur de l'étude, dans une interview avec la radio NPR. " Ils l'ont simplement acceptée comme un fait. "

L'étude a également évalué la capacité des étudiants à distinguer les publicités des articles informatifs. Sur 350 collégiens, 75 % ont réussi à différencier publicités traditionnelles et informations. Cependant, les publicités dites natives, publiées dans un format similaire aux contenus de la plateforme où elles apparaissent, leur ont donné plus de fil à retordre. Plus de 80 % des 350 étudiants ont considéré que ces publicités natives étaient des informations, même lorsqu'elles arboraient clairement la mention " contenu sponsorisé ".

Quand il s'agit de mieux former la jeune génération à l'évaluation des contenus en ligne, Amanda Warner le dit simplement : " Enseigner le scepticisme, en particulier aux collégiens et aux lycéens, répond à une nécessité absolue dans le monde actuel. "
Pour en savoir plus :
Fake It To Make It
Mission:Information Teaching Kit
Evaluating Sources in a 'Post-Truth' World: Ideas for Teaching and Learning About Fake News Evaluating Information: The Cornerstone of Civic Online Reasoning, Stanford History Education Group, 2016

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Un jeu éducatif pour lutter contre la désinformation en ligne

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Le jeu en ligne Fake It To Make It repose sur un principe pour le moins original : créer et gérer des sites de fausses informations pour amasser de l'argent. Plus un joueur génère de la peur, des conséquences dramatiques, mais malgré tout de la crédibilité, plus il gagne des dollars.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is 'fake news,' and how can you spot it? Try our quiz

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's a term with a lot of pejorative and partisan baggage, but 'fake news' describes a real problem: Media that's custom-made to fool you. Globe digital editor Evan Annett offers some pointers on how to avoid falling for hoaxes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Imagine this: two news articles are shared simultaneously online.

The first is a deeply reported and thoroughly fact-checked story from a credible news-gathering organisation - perhaps Le Monde, The Wall Street Journal, or Süddeutsche Zeitung.

The second is a false or misleading story. But the article is designed to mimic content from a credible newsroom, from its headline to the way in which it has been shared.

How do the two articles fare?

The first article - designed to inform - receives limited attention. The second article - designed for virality - accumulates shares. It exploits the way your brain processes new information, and the way social media decides what to show you. It percolates across the internet, spreading misinformation.

This isn't a hypothetical scenario - it's happening now in the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and beyond. The Pope did not endorse a US presidential candidate, nor does India's 2,000-rupee note contain a tracking device. But fabricated content, misleading headlines, and false context convinced millions of internet users otherwise.

This type of fraud is reaching epidemic proportions worldwide, at least in part because the online advertising economy that underlies much of today's internet is terribly broken. The rise of misinformation discussed under today's catch-all banner of 'fake news' needs to be understood in the context of unhealthy market realities that can reward malicious behaviour for profit or political gain.

Most people are getting at least some of their news from social media now. In order to maximise profits from displaying ads, news feeds and timelines show the content that attracts the most attention. This ends up favouring headlines that scream for reactions (expressed as shares, 'likes' and comments). Add to this the ability to boost the visibility of any message by buying an ad and targeting the people most likely to react to it (based on interests, behaviours and relationships), and anyone can churn out disinformation at unbelievable rates and then track their success.

Finding fixes

Online misinformation is a major threat to the health of the internet and all of the societies it touches because of the potential for political disorder, the undermining of the truth, and the hatred and rumours that can spread in conflict or disaster zones, but also because attempted quick fixes by politicians (with or without ulterior motives) may threaten the openness of the internet.

For example, Germany's reaction to misinformation and hate speech online was to make social media platforms responsible for taking down unlawful content. Other countries, including Russia and Kenya, have passed laws that follow suit. We should be wary of any solutions that make Facebook, Twitter or any other corporations (or their algorithms) the gatekeepers of the internet.

Instead of quick fixes, we need to take the time to better understand the problem and the kaleidoscope of actors and symptoms. We're facing a mix of junk news, computational propaganda, information pollution and low digital literacy.

Numerous people are already working on ways to tackle parts of the problem. Developers and publishers are trying to build more thoughtful and balanced communities around their news. The Credibility Coalition is working on a web standard to support the detection of less trustworthy and unreliable content. Teachers are developing curricula to help their students grapple with misinformation. And social platforms are trying to make political ads more transparent, although with limited effect. These are still early days for many ideas.

Even if efforts like these succeed, many argue that we'll still have to tackle a bigger internet health problem: the underlying online advertising and engagement model that rewards abuse, fraud and misinformation. It's hard to imagine fixing this problem without regulation, radical changes in internet business models, or both.

Mozilla is a global community of technologists, thinkers and builders working together to keep the Internet alive and accessible, so people worldwide can be informed contributors and creators of the web.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The first is a deeply reported and thoroughly fact-checked story from a credible news-gathering organisation - perhaps Le Monde, The Wall Street Journal, or Süddeutsche Zeitung. The second is a false or misleading story. But the article is designed to mimic content from a credible newsroom, from its headline to the way in which it has been shared.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Information for Teachers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
filter bubble définition, signification, ce qu'est filter bubble: 1. a situation in which someone only hears or sees news and information that supports what they.... En savoir plus.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Filter bubbles are information bubbles that are created through the personalisation of the Internet. So-called trackers collect data and information that users leave behind. The data collected are used to create profiles which enable algorithms to create and present personalised information. This way, the user's interests are permanently mirrored on the web and information which does not correspond to his or her own opinion is isolated.

This interactive test will enable you to find out how deep you are stuck in a filter bubble of your own. The questions are very specific and at the same time provide instructions on how to proceed in order to burst your own filter bubble.

Answer the questions with yes or no (thumbs up or thumbs down). You will then navigate to the next question. For each question, you will find additional information which elaborates on the questions and makes it easier for you to answer them. Proceed step by step through the questions until your result is shown. There you will find out how deep you are in your filter bubble and what else you can do to burst your bubble.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How deep are you stuck in your filter bubble?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This interactive test will enable you to find out how deep you are stuck in a filter bubble of your own. The questions are very specific and at the same time provide instructions to how to proceed in order to burst your own filter bubble.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Each autumn, Britain's Collins Dictionary announces a Word of the Year, a word or expression that has been omnipresent. For 2017, the WOTY is "fake news", a term often associated with President Trump.

The expression was used a lot during the election campaign. Since his inauguration in January, President Trump has brandished it regularly, on his Twitter feed and in speech. A particular target has been any news story linking his election campaign with Russian finance or intelligence.

Collins' research shows that use of the term has increased 365% this year.

The term was originally used to describe satirical news items on TV shows like The Daily Show, but, according to Collins, "Around 2005, the term began to be applied to false news stories that were circulated with malicious intent."

A perfect example of that is the story that appeared during the election campaign that Hillary Clinton and other leading Democrats were running a child sex ring from the basement of a pizza restaurant in Washington. The only modicum of truth in the "Pizzagate" story was that the restaurant owner was a donor to the Democratic party. The restaurant doesn't even have a basement. But that didn't stop an armed 28-year-old-man from turning up at the restaurant to "investigate" and firing his rifle. Luckily no one was hurt.

That story, and the term "fake news" are closely linked to another term that made the WOTY short list:

The echo chamber phenomenon has been blamed for surprise results in the U.S. election, the Brexit referendum, etc. An increasing proportion of people mainly consume news that an algorithm chooses for them in a "newsfeed". Facebook was challenged for its role in "pushing" news stories to Internet users based on their similarity to content they had previously viewed.

Only listening to one side of an argument is not good for impartiality or informed debate even when the information is biased but true. When you throw fake news into the mix, it can become dangerous.

During the presidential campaigns, whole teams of people produced fake news stories with political intent - generally discrediting political opponents and spreading within an echo chamber.

But there are also people who make a living out of fake news. Their aim is to get as many clicks or shares as possible, so the more outrageous the story the better. The more the story is shared, the more advertising revenue they can accrue.

Many such sites say that their content is clearly satirical and only made for entertainment. For example, readers seeing the headline:"Britain threatens to invade Switzerland over Toblerone shape row"should be able to work out that there is unlikely to be military incident over a chocolate bar. Especially when the site says it is written by "Doug Trench, Defence editor".

Whether fake news is truly sinister or just a bit of a laugh, it seems to be here to stay.

Webpicks Useful websites and online tools for classroom use
> April Fools Fact-checking Resources

Notion(s) culturelle(s) : "Langages"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Each autumn, Britain's Collins Dictionary announces a Word of the Year, a word or expression that has been omnipresent. For 2017, the WOTY is "fake news", a term often associated with President Trump. The expression was used a lot during the election campaign.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Explained: What Are Deepfakes?

What are Deepfakes?

Deepfakes are fake videos created using digital software, machine learning and face swapping. Deepfakes are computer-created artificial videos in which images are combined to create new footage that depicts events, statements or action that never actually happened. The results can be quite convincing. Deep fakes differ from other forms of false information by being very difficult to identify as false.

How does it work?

The basic concept behind the technology is facial recognition, users of Snapchat will be familiar with the face swap or filters functions which apply transformations or augment your facial features. Deep Fakes are similar but much more realistic. Fake videos can be created using a machine learning technique called a "generative adversarial network" or GAN. For example a GAN can look at thousands of photos of Beyonce and produce a new image that approximates those photos without being an exact copy of any one of the photos. GAN can be used to generate new audio from existing audio, or new text from existing text - it is a multi-use technology. The technology used to create Deep Fakes is programmed to map faces according to "landmark" points. These are features like the corners of your eyes and mouth, your nostrils, and the contour of your jawline.

When seeing is no longer believing

While the technology used to create deep fakes is relatively new technology, it is advancing quickly and it is becoming more and more difficult to check if a video is real or not. Developments in these kinds of technologies have obvious social, moral and political implications. There are already issues around news sources and credibility of stories online, deep fakes have the potential to exacerbate the problem of false information online or disrupt and undermine the credibility of and trust in news, and information in general.

The real potential danger of false information and deepfake technology is creating mistrust or apathy in people about what we see or hear online. If everything could be fake does that mean that nothing is real anymore? For as long as we have had photographs and video and audio footage they have helped learn about our past and shaped our how we see and know things. Some people already question the facts around events that unquestionably happened, like the Holocaust, the moon landing and 9/11, despite video proof. If deepfakes make people believe they can't trust video, the problems of false information and conspiracy theories could get worse.

Social Media Analyst Carl Miller and Nina Schick discuss the rise of Deepfakes, and what she believes is an impending 'infocalypse'.

The Ted Talk fake videos of real people, and how to spot them, is also a good overview of deepfake technology.

False news can lead to false memories

One of the most common concerns and potential dangers of deep fakes and false information in general is the impact it can have on democratic processes and elections.

A recent survey from UCC confirmed that people recall fake news more than real news. The results of the survey indicated that voters may form false memories after seeing fabricated news stories, especially if those stories align with their political beliefs, according to a new study. The researchers suggest the findings indicate how voters may be influenced in upcoming political contests, like the 2020 US presidential race.

Author of the report Dr. Gillian Murphy added; "This demonstrates the ease with which we can plant these entirely fabricated memories, despite this voter suspicion and even despite an explicit warning that they may have been shown fake news,".
Read more about it here.
How to spot deepfakes

Like all types of information we encounter online the most important thing we can do when deciding if videos or images online are authentic and real is to use critical thinking.
We need to use critical thinking, and ask ourselves key questions such as:

Who and why is someone sharing this video?

Who or what is the original source?

Is the person in the video saying something you'd never expect them to say?

Does the video advance someone else's agenda? Who benefits from this video?

Verifying information online

With so much access to information, advances in technology and the speed at which news and information spread online, it is becoming increasingly difficult to verify information online. Critical thinking skills are necessary when it comes to verifying online content.
Whether you are looking at a video, photo meme or article, here are some helpful considerations from First Draft to verify information online:
Provenance: Are you looking at the original account, article or piece of content?

Source: Who created the account or article, or captured the original piece of content?

Date: When was it created?

Location: Where was the account established, website created or piece of content captured?

Motivation: Why was the account established, website created or the piece of content captured?

Useful Links:
First Draft's Essential Guide To Verifying Online Information

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Deepfakes are fake videos created using digital software, machine learning and face swapping. Deepfakes are computer-created artificial videos in which images are combined to create new footage that depicts events, statements or action that never actually happened. The results can be quite convincing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Find out more about BIK youth participation activities

Youth participation activities are at the heart of the BIK Youth programme. Using co-creation methods, young people will work with other stakeholders to develop online safety guidance, learning and campaigning materials, and contribute to decision-making processes to help create a better internet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find out more about BIK youth participation activities Youth participation activities are at the heart of the BIK Youth programme. Using co-creation methods, young people will work with other stakeholders to develop online safety guidance, learning and campaigning materials, and contribute to decision-making processes to help create a better internet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Today the different media provide us with greater access to information than ever in history. Moreover, media practices are changing: instead of being external spectators and information receivers, people have become content creators and they interact with the information in various ways.

These opportunities also present us with challenges, making media literacy skills more important than ever. Furthermore, digital media require us not only to focus on technical ability but also on the broader social, ethical, legal and economic aspects of digital use. To this end we have selected for you the following three examples of media education.
The Danish Film Institute: the educational power of films in the classrooms
The long-standing relationship between the Danish film industry and the Ministry of Education begun in 1972 with the National Film Act (revised in 1982) with an objective of ensuring 'the right of children to experience artistic reflection on the realities of life'.

Since then, the Danish Film Institute (DFI) has been safeguarding this relationship by providing films and related educational materials for classrooms and helping teachers to enhance their teaching methods.

The DFI offers a variety of educational activities, such as:

Online streaming of films to schools by Filmcentralen. About 90% of schools are subscribed to the film service, which has about 1600 films to offer, mainly short fiction and documentaries. Filmcentralen provides also teaching materials and study guides.

The 'School Cinema' programme uses local cinemas as a classroom. It currently involves 120 cinemas and covers 80% of the country's municipalities, benefiting around 235,000 participants each year. All the films come with free educational material.

FILM-X, a computer-based interactive film studio in Copenhagen, allows children to discover for themselves how a film is made and try out different roles as director, actor or editor.

CLEMI: the French media and information centre
The CLEMI is responsible for media education in France. The centre's goal is to arm students with skills that will make them competent in reading and deciphering information and images, will sharpen their critical thinking, and finally will teach them how to form and express their opinions responsibly.

CLEMI provides training opportunities and educational support to teachers of primary and secondary education. It also provides access to a rich gallery of resources, where teachers can find publications, documentaries, teaching materials and videos.

Teachers can also find tutorials on how to create media, newspapers, blogs and websites, or even a web radio, with the participation of their students. This is a great opportunity for students to develop skills in media production and subsequently develop their linguistic skills, techniques of information and communication, civic competences, and initiative.

In 2016, CLEMI organised the event La Journée du Direct, where the students had the opportunity to produce news in the form of text, images, sound and video. For 2017, CLEMI is preparing the annual Educational Week of the press and media in schools ( la Semaine de la presse et des médias dans l'école) taking place on 20-25 March.
Students' Online Safety: European students create narratives/a European project
A very important aspect of digital literacy is to raise awareness regarding the risks of the Internet.

Between 2012 and 2014, the Lifelong Learning Programme project Students' Online Safety aimed to inform students, teachers and parents about the challenges brought by the use of digital devices, and to provide guidelines to support young people's responsible use of digital devices and the Internet. The project focused specifically on four topics: cyberbullying, online reputation, sexting, and smartphones.

The eight project partners from different European countries involved each around 25 students, aged 15, in creating theatrical performances, video clips, posters and leaflets. While doing so the students were able to express their concerns and questions, receive accurate information, and learn about safe and correct use of digital devices. Find all the project results and outcomes here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Media literacy: the digital alphabet song

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Today the different media provide us with greater access to information than ever in history. Moreover, media practices are changing: instead of being external spectators and information receivers, people have become content creators and they interact with the information in various ways. These opportunities also present us with challenges, making media literacy skills more important than ever.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ideally this lesson is for teenagers, but it can also be used with adults. The lesson begins with a brief discussion about news and fake news.

Students then skim read two webpages. One website is about the Tree Octopus (a spoof), while the other is about the Octopus Tree. After a brief reading comprehension activity, students study the websites, using a set of questions to help them. The goal is to discover which one is the fake website and why it's fake!

As a final activity, students find other fake news stories currently circulating the internet. They choose one from the list and design a post or meme advising their friends not to fall for it.

Aims:

To expand knowledge of vocabulary related to news and the media

To raise students' awareness of fake news through discussion and reading

To develop students' 21st-century skills, including critical thinking, collaboration and media literacy

Age/level:
Older teenagers and adults at CEF level B1 and above

Time:

45-60 minutes

Materials:

The teachers' notes and student worksheets are available to download in PDF format

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Introduction Ideally this lesson is for teenagers, but it can also be used with adults. The lesson begins with a brief discussion about news and fake news. Students then skim read two webpages. One website is about the Tree Octopus (a spoof), while the other is about the Octopus Tree.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Retrouvez la leçon et de nombreuses autres ressources sur la page Fact or fiction?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Retrouvez la leçon et de nombreuses autres ressources sur la page The news we read

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Horrible Histories | Fake News Song | Flo and Joan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
It’s Getting Harder to Spot a Deep Fake Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Spot Fake News (and Teach Kids to Be Media-Savvy)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Clickbait, hyper-partisan opinion, and completely false information are running wild across the internet. Advice from Common Sense Media editors.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fake News: Should you learn about it in school? - CBBC Newsround

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An expert says children should be taught how to spot fake news on social media, and how to handle it when you do.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
FAKE NEWS DEFINED IN WORDS AND BY ILLUSTRATION

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The rise of Donald Trump and future destruction of progressive Democrats.