Miraculous Finland is on top again!

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 11, 2023

Or at least, so the New York Times says: It's been a while since miraculous Finland was being hailed by our upper-end mainstream press corps.

This morning, the miraculous nation was back on top once again! These are the headlines which appear atop a news report in the New York Times:

How Finland Is Teaching a Generation to Spot Misinformation
The Nordic country is testing new ways to teach students about propaganda. Here’s what other countries can learn from its success.

According to those headlines, the miraculous nation is teaching its students how to spot misinformation. 

How successful have those efforts been? In this passage, Jenny Gross explains, or at least she may seem to do so:

GROSS (1/11/23): A typical lesson that Saara Martikka, a teacher in Hameenlinna, Finland, gives her students goes like this: She presents her eighth graders with news articles. Together, they discuss: What’s the purpose of the article? How and when was it written? What are the author’s central claims?

[...]

Her goal, like that of teachers around Finland, is to help students learn to identify false information.

Finland ranked No. 1 of 41 European countries on resilience against misinformation for the fifth time in a row in a survey published in October by the Open Society Institute in Sofia, Bulgaria. Officials say Finland’s success is not just the result of its strong education system, which is one of the best in the world, but also because of a concerted effort to teach students about fake news. Media literacy is part of the national core curriculum starting in preschool.

According to the news report, Finnish schools make "a concerted effort" to teach their students how to spot misinformation—"fake news." Gross takes it as a sign of the schools' success when Finland is ranked No. 1 among 41 nations in this annual survey by the Open Society Institute.

It's mildly ironic when an article about spotting misinformation is based on such a shaky linkage. Why do we say that?

Here's why:

Are people in Finland really the best at "resilience against misinformation?" (Presumably, at spotting misinformation.) If so, are people in Finland good at spotting misinformation because of those fairly recent efforts in Finland's public schools?

We have no idea! For starters, here's the way the Open Society Institute conducts the survey in question:

GROSS:  After Finland, the European countries that ranked highest for resilience to misinformation in the Open Society Institute survey were Norway, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland and Sweden. The countries that were the most vulnerable to misinformation were Georgia, North Macedonia, Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Albania. The survey results were calculated based on scores for press freedom, the level of trust in society and scores in reading, science and math.

The survey in question bases its rankings on three phenomena:

1) "Press freedom"

2) "The level of trust in society"

3) Public school scores in reading, science and math (on the PISA)

In theory, it's good to have high public school test scores. In theory, it's also good to have "press freedom," assuming there's some way to define and measure such a thing. 

Beyond that, it also sounds like it's a good thing to have a high "level of trust in society," whatever exactly that means. It sounds like those are all good things!

It sounds like those are good things! But which of those three phenomena necessarily indicate that the people of the country in question are able to spot misinformation in news reports? What if the newspapers of some country are full of misinformation, but the people of the country are filled with a high level of societal trust?

Apparently, the Finnish schools are trying to teach Finnish kids to spot and reject "fake news." That sounds like a good thing to do, and these efforts may well produce good long-term results.

That said, we see no particular evidence that these efforts actually are working among the kids in question, or that these abilities have somehow magically jumped to the broader swath of Finnish adults. Beyond that, we see no evidence—none at all—which indicates that adults in Finland are especially good—are best in Europe—at spotting "fake news."

It may well be that they are, of course. But it also could be that they aren't!

All in all, this news report ends up as many such reports do—with several teachers saying their program works really well, and with the New York Times simply assuming that these assertions are true. 

Meanwhile, the Open Society Institute has tried to measure three worthwhile societal characteristics, but it isn't clear why anyone should think that their calculations necessarily translate into the ability of a nation's population to spot and reject fake news.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but we humans tend to like superficially pleasing stories. In a report about spotting fake news, it seems to us that the New York Times has purchased a rather shaky assortment of unverifiable claims.

14 comments:

  1. "Are people in Finland really the best at "resilience against misinformation?"

    They didn't make that claim. They said the schools came in 1st in a survey. That doesn't mean all the people of Finland are best -- most of them won't have gone through this training in school, if they are older.

    This is a bait and switch and Somerby does this a lot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Church Lady is delusional ya'll - or maybe just a big fat liar. Seriously, you can't trust a single thing she says. I think most of us who frequent the comments section have learned to mostly ignore her comments because she has so often misstated things - presumably because of the axe she has to grind against Somerby. Every time I've bothered to slow down and actually read her comments critically, there's always something problematic. And when she's called out on it, she never acknowledges wrongdoing. Here is what the article says, Church Lady: "Finland ranked No. 1 of 41 European countries on resilience against misinformation for the fifth time in a row in a survey published in October by the Open Society Institute." If you click the link in the artice and read the actual summary of the survey, it doesn't say the survey only applies to schools. Here's how it starts: "Finland (1st), Norway (2nd), Denmark (3rd) and Estonia(4th), followed by Sweden (5th) and Ireland (6th), with nearly identical scores, are at the top of the ranking of the Media Literacy Index 2022. As in previous years, Finland remains No1 among the 41 European countries included in the index. These countries have the highest potential to withstand the negative impact of fake news and misinformation due to the quality of education, free media and high trust among people." Now, watch Church Lady deny reality, dodge the issue, change the subject -- anything but acknowledge that she's wrong.

      Delete
    2. You don’t even know who you’re responding to, Mike.

      Delete
  2. "That said, we see no particular evidence that these efforts actually are working among the kids in question, or that these abilities have somehow magically jumped to the broader swath of Finnish adults. "

    Who said they did? Not the excerpt of the article Somerby quoted, unless he didn't quote that part (i.e., disappeared it). The claim is merely that the Finnish schools are trying to teach their kids to spot misinformation.

    Why would Somerby go out of his way to denigrate such a program? Does he think it is not possible to "spot" misinformation? All you need to do that is teach kids correct information, or teach them how to look up answers so they can check what they do not actually know for a fact.

    But why is Somerby so down on Finland? Or is he down on information? Hard to tell, since he doesn't tell us why Finland is his target today. Are they at fault because they are trying to teach their kids? Is that so wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  3. "All in all, this news report ends up as many such reports do—with several teachers saying their program works really well, and with the New York Times simply assuming that these assertions are true. "

    Most schools, when they implement a new program, incorporate an examination of whether the kids are learning as intended. Is Somerby saying that these kids are taking no tests, that there is no evaluation of their progress at all? That would be a very unusual classroom approach. Somerby has no reason to think they are doing no assessment of student progress. But he claims that is what is going on anyway. Because why assume the Finnish schools are competent?

    It is almost as if Somerby goes out looking for something positive to trash and then leans over backwards to assume they are doing things wrong, if they omit the obvious because they think it is obvious, such as that students are given assessments of their progress, because that's what all schools do.

    And what has irked Somerby about the report? Is it that it is Finland (who are often considered the best schools in the world on tests such as TIMMS) doing something innovative? Or is it because they are talking about fake news, which is what Somerby spreads deep and wide here so many days of the week? Or is it just that he resents it when any kids learn, since he had so much difficulty teaching his own classes?

    There is something about Somerby that doesn't like it when kids succeed. And that is exceedingly odd for a teacher, but not so odd for a narcissist who left teaching to become a standup comedian. He cannot applaud those ratty teachers who are better at their jobs and doing some good in the world.

    Or maybe he just thinks that talking about fake news is a violation of Trump's copyright.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "it seems to us that the New York Times has purchased a rather shaky assortment of unverifiable claims."

    How is teaching kids to recognize fake news "unverifiable"? You teach them how to spot fake news, then give them a previously unseen news report containing fake news, and ask them to recognize the fake news in it. That seems pretty straightforward to me.

    Somerby strongly implies that this news report about Finland is fake news. He doesn't come right out and say so, because he doesn't know that they didn't test their kids and see how well they did after the classroom teaching, especially compared to kids the same ago who didn't have the new teaching. Somerby wants to say they had no evaluation, but he doesn't know that for sure, and it seems very unlikely to assume it. But he doesn't everything except call this story fake. He calls it pleasing instead. But why shouldn't we be pleased when kids learn? Isn't he?

    And then he blames the NY Times for published a pleasurable story. As if the NY Times went out of its way to avoid reporting all the bad stuff that happens, the horrible weather, the grounded planes, the dysfunctional Republicans, the celebrity deaths, and only prints feel-good stories. That is ridiculous and everyone knows it. So what is wrong with talking about a good idea happening in Finland -- schools fighting back against propaganda and giving its kids some tools to keep from becoming QAnon (or equivalent) believers?

    Meanwhile, our schools are being denied access to freedom of thought and teachers are being driven out by repressive laws. The contrast between FL school laws and freedom-loving Finland should be the topic of Somerby's essay, not blaming the NY Times and Finland for attempting to protect kids from right-wing mind control.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're stupid. How is what is fake determined? Who does the measuring?

      Delete
    2. Fake is determined by fact checking. Facts are facts and don’t change depending on who checks them.

      Delete

  5. tl;dr
    "Finland ranked No. 1 of 41 European countries on resilience against misinformation for the fifth time"

    Yeah, come to think of it, dear Bob, the Finnish fella we once knew, he did indeed seem totally square.

    Tsk. Thanks. Yes, a negligibly small sample, but it does make sense now...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Finns are good, decent people.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Finland has a problem with disinformation coming from neighboring Russia. This teaching arises from a coherent organized government response to such disinformation. Somerby doesn’t mention that, does he?

    ReplyDelete
  8. “In theory, it's also good to have "press freedom," assuming there's some way to define and measure such a thing. “

    It’s an important concept, worth more than a shrug of the shoulders or an “in theory” from someone who calls himself a media critic.

    The Open Society Institute has a more detailed description of its index here:

    https://osis.bg/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/HowItStarted_MediaLiteracyIndex2022_ENG_.pdf

    There you will find that the freedom of the press score comes from two ratings, one from something called “Freedom House”, and the other from “Reporters Without Borders”, an important world press organization.

    Maybe Somerby has heard of it. Maybe his readers might find it worthwhile to read their methodology for determining the level of press freedom in different countries.

    Or perhaps his readers will join his flippant attitude here.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Bob absolutely refuses to take seriously the crisis'the Right’s foolishness is causing the country, yet he bemoans those stuck on pleasing narratives. You should try to face a little
    reality yourself Bob.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The Daily Howler gets results:

    "After hovering near 50% in recent years, the percentage of Democrats who identify as politically liberal rose four percentage points in 2022 to 54%, a new high for this group. At the same time, the 10% describing themselves as conservative is the lowest to date."

    ReplyDelete