{"rowid": 291, "title": "Information Literacy Is a Design Problem", "contents": "Information literacy, wrote Dr. Carol Kulthau in her 1987 paper \u201cInformation Skills for an Information Society,\u201d is \u201cthe ability to read and to use information essential for everyday life\u201d\u2014that is, to effectively navigate a world built on \u201ccomplex masses of information generated by computers and mass media.\u201d\nNearly thirty years later, those \u201ccomplex masses of information\u201d have only grown wilder, thornier, and more constant. We call the internet a firehose, yet we\u2019re loathe to turn it off (or even down). The amount of information we consume daily is staggering\u2014and yet our ability to fully understand it all remains frustratingly insufficient. \nThis should hit a very particular chord for those of us working on the web. We may be developers, designers, or strategists\u2014we may not always be responsible for the words themselves\u2014but we all know that communication is much more than just words. From fonts to form fields, every design decision that we make changes the way information is perceived\u2014for better or for worse.\nWhat\u2019s more, the design decisions that we make feed into larger patterns. They don\u2019t just affect the perception of a single piece of information on a single site; they start to shape reader expectations of information anywhere. Users develop cumulative mental models of how websites should be: where to find a search bar, where to look at contact information, how to filter a product list. \nAnd yet: our models fail us. Fundamentally, we\u2019re not good at parsing information, and that\u2019s troubling. Our experience of an \u201cinformation society\u201d may have evolved, but the skills Dr. Kuhlthau spoke of are even more critical now: our lives depend on information literacy.\nPatterns from words\nLet\u2019s start at the beginning: with the words. Our choice of words can drastically alter a message, from its emotional resonance to its context to its literal meaning. Sometimes we can use word choice for good, to reinvigorate old, forgotten, or unfairly besmirched ideas.\nOne time at a wedding bbq we labeled the coleslaw BRASSICA MIXTA so people wouldn\u2019t skip it based on false hatred.\u2014 Eileen Webb (@webmeadow) November 27, 2016\n\nWe can also use clever word choice to build euphemisms, to name sensitive or intimate concepts without conjuring their full details. This trick gifts us with language like \u201cthe beast with two backs\u201d (thanks, Shakespeare!) and \u201csurfing the crimson wave\u201d (thanks, Cher Horowitz!).\nBut when we grapple with more serious concepts\u2014war, death, human rights\u2014this habit of declawing our language gets dangerous. Using more discrete wording serves to nullify the concepts themselves, euphemizing them out of sight and out of mind.\nThe result? Politicians never lie, they just \u201cmisspeak.\u201d Nobody\u2019s racist, but plenty of people are \u201ceconomically anxious.\u201d Nazis have rebranded as \u201calt-right.\u201d \nI\u2019m not an asshole, I\u2019m just alt-nice.\u2014 Andi Zeisler (@andizeisler) November 22, 2016\n\nThe problem with euphemisms like these is that they quickly infect everyday language. We use the words we hear around us. The more often we see \u201calt-right\u201d instead of \u201cNazi,\u201d the more likely we are to use that phrase ourselves\u2014normalizing the term as well as the terrible ideas behind it.\nPatterns from sentences\nThat process of normalization gets a boost from the media, our main vector of information about the world outside ourselves. Headlines control how we interpret the news that follows\u2014even if the story contradicts it in the end. We hear the framing more clearly than the content itself, coloring our interpretation of the news over time.\nEven worse, headlines are often written to encourage clicks, not to convey critical information. When headline-writing is driven by sensationalism, it\u2019s much, much easier to build a pattern of misinformation. Take this CBS News headline: \u201cDonald Trump: \u2018Millions\u2019 voted illegally for Hillary Clinton.\u201d The headline makes no indication that this an objectively false statement; instead, this word choice subtly suggestions that millions did, in fact, illegally vote for Hillary Clinton.\nHeadlines like this are what make lying a worthwhile political strategy. https://t.co/DRjGeYVKmW\u2014 Binyamin Appelbaum (@BCAppelbaum) November 27, 2016\n\nThis is a deeply dangerous choice of words when headlines are the primary way that news is conveyed\u2014especially on social media, where it\u2019s much faster to share than to actually read the article. In fact, according to a study from the Media Insight Project, \u201croughly six in 10 people acknowledge that they have done nothing more than read news headlines in the past week.\u201d \nIf a powerful person asserts X there are 2 responsible ways to cover:1. \u201cX is true\u201d2. \u201cPerson incorrectly thinks X\u201dNever \u201cPerson says X\u201d\u2014 Helen Rosner (@hels) November 27, 2016\n\nEven if we do, in fact, read the whole article, there\u2019s no guarantee that we\u2019re thinking critically about it. A study conducted by Stanford found that \u201c82 percent of students could not distinguish between a sponsored post and an actual news article on the same website. Nearly 70 percent of middle schoolers thought they had no reason to distrust a sponsored finance article written by the CEO of a bank, and many students evaluate the trustworthiness of tweets based on their level of detail and the size of attached photos.\u201d \nFriends: our information literacy is not very good. Luckily, we\u2014workers of the web\u2014are in a position to improve it.\nSentences into design\nConsider the presentation of those all-important headlines in social media cards, as on Facebook. The display is a combination of both the card\u2019s design and the article\u2019s source code, and looks something like this:\n\nA large image, a large headline; perhaps a brief description; and, at the bottom, in pale gray, a source and an author\u2019s name. \nThose choices convey certain values: specifically, they suggest that the headline and the picture are the entire point. The source is so deemphasized that it\u2019s easy to see how fake news gains a foothold: daily exposure to this kind of hierarchy has taught us that sources aren\u2019t important. \nAnd that\u2019s the message from the best-case scenario. Not every article shows every piece of data. Take this headline from the BBC: \u201cWisconsin receives request for vote recount.\u201d \n\nWith no image, no description, and no author, there\u2019s little opportunity to signal trust or provide nuance. There\u2019s also no date\u2014ever\u2014which presents potentially misleading complications, especially in the context of \u201cbreaking news.\u201d \nAnd lest you think dates don\u2019t matter in the light-speed era of social media, take the headline, \u201cMaryland sidesteps electoral college.\u201d Shared into my feed two days after the US presidential election, that\u2019s some serious news with major historical implications. But since there\u2019s no date on this card, there\u2019s no way for readers to know that the \u201cTuesday\u201d it refers to was in 2007. Again, a design choice has made misinformation far too contagious.\n\nMore recently, I posted my personal reaction to the death of Fidel Castro via a series of twenty tweets. Wanting to share my thoughts with friends and family who don\u2019t use Twitter, I then posted the first tweet to Facebook. The card it generated was less than ideal:\n\nThe information hierarchy created by this approach prioritizes the name of the Twitter user (not even the handle), along with the avatar. Not only does that create an awkward \u201cheadline\u201d (at least when you include a full stop in your name), but it also minimizes the content of the tweet itself\u2014which was the whole point. \nThe arbitrary elevation of some pieces of content over others\u2014like huge headlines juxtaposed with minimized sources\u2014teaches readers that these values are inherent to the content itself: that the headline is the news, that the source is irrelevant. We train readers to stop looking for the information we don\u2019t put in front of them. \nThese aren\u2019t life-or-death scenarios; they are just cases where design decisions noticeably dictate the perception of information. Not every design decision makes so obvious an impact, but the impact is there. Every single action adds to the pattern.\nDesign with intention\nWe can\u2019t necessarily teach people to read critically or vet their sources or stop believing conspiracy theories (or start believing facts). Our reach is limited to our roles: we make websites and products for companies and colleges and startups.\nBut we have more reach there than we might realize. Every decision we make influences how information is presented in the world. Every presentation adds to the pattern. No matter how innocuous our organization, how lowly our title, how small our user base\u2014every single one of us contributes, a little bit, to the way information is perceived.\nAre we changing it for the better?\nWhile it\u2019s always been crucial to act ethically in the building of the web, our cultural climate now requires dedicated, individual conscientiousness. It\u2019s not enough to think ourselves neutral, to dismiss our work as meaningless or apolitical. Everything is political. Every action, and every inaction, has an impact.\nAs Chappell Ellison put it much more eloquently than I can:\nEvery single action and decision a designer commits is a political act. The question is, are you a conscious actor?\u2014 Chappell Ellison\ud83e\udd14 (@ChappellTracker) November 28, 2016\n\nAs shapers of information, we have a responsibility: to create clarity, to further understanding, to advance truth. Every single one of us must choose to treat information\u2014and the society it builds\u2014with integrity.", "year": "2016", "author": "Lisa Maria Martin", "author_slug": "lisamariamartin", "published": "2016-12-14T00:00:00+00:00", "url": "https://24ways.org/2016/information-literacy-is-a-design-problem/", "topic": "content"}