Spotting Power: Reframing Media Literacy in Civic Education

This page features your published research article in Democracy & Education, titled "Spotting Power: Reframing Media Literacy in Civic Education."

The article argues that media literacy education must go beyond checking whether a source "sounds professional." Students need to ask deeper questions: Who benefits if people doubt this evidence? Who funded the research? Is this claim accepted by the relevant expert community? Is uncertainty being honestly explained, or weaponized to prevent action?

Environmental science exposed a major weakness in free-market thinking: markets often ignore costs they do not directly pay for. Pollution, disease, ecosystem damage, and climate change are examples of negative externalities. When science revealed those costs, some defenders of deregulation attacked the science rather than confront the market failure.

This is why media literacy must go beyond asking whether a source sounds professional. Students need to ask: Who benefits if people doubt this evidence? Who funded the research? Is this claim accepted by the relevant expert community? Is uncertainty being honestly explained, or weaponized to prevent action?

Science is rarely absolute. But waiting for perfect certainty can become a recipe for permanent inaction. Responsible citizenship requires learning the difference between reasonable doubt and manufactured doubt.

The lesson is simple: when powerful interests cannot win the argument on evidence, they often try to win by confusing the public about what counts as evidence.