Information Warfare, Virtual Politics, and Narrative Dominance

 

By Lilian H. Hill

As the Internet becomes more advanced, it is giving rise to new challenges for democracy. Social media platforms sort users into like-minded groups, forming echo chambers that reinforce existing beliefs. Pariser (2011) states that in a world shaped by personalization, we are shown news that aligns with our preferences and reinforces our existing beliefs. Because these filters operate invisibly, we may remain unaware of what information is excluded. This dynamic contributes to the growing disconnect between individuals with differing political views, making mutual understanding more difficult. It also enables extremist groups to harness these platforms for harmful purposes. While diverse opinions are inherent to politics, social media has created a fast-paced, ever-evolving space where political discord is continuously generated (De’Alba, 2024).

Information warfare is the strategic use of information to influence, disrupt, or manipulate public opinion, decision-making, or infrastructure, often in service of political, military, or economic goals. Instead of physical force, information warfare targets the cognitive and informational environments of adversaries. Pai (2024) comments that information warfare has become central to international politics in the Information Age in which society is shaped by the creation, use, and impact of information. According to Rid (2020), information warfare aims to undermine trust between individuals and institutions. It includes tactics like propaganda, disinformation, cyberattacks, and psychological operations. In today’s digital era, state and non-state actors use social media, news platforms, and digital technologies to conduct disinformation campaigns, often blurring the lines between truth and manipulation (Pomerantsev, 2019).

Virtual politics refers to the strategic use of digital technologies, including social media, artificial intelligence, and data analytics, to manipulate political perceptions, simulate democratic engagement, and manipulate public opinion. Originally coined in the post-Soviet context, the term captured how political elites created fake parties, opposition figures, and civil society groups to manufacture the illusion of pluralism and democratic process (Krastev, 2006). Contemporary virtual politics functions through multiple mechanisms. One tactic is the creation of simulated political actors and events, where governments or interest groups establish fake NGOs, social movements, or social media accounts to fragment opposition or feign civic engagement. These simulations create an illusion of public discourse while neutralizing dissent (Krastev, 2006). A contemporary example is Russia’s promotion of fake social media accounts and organizations during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Russian operatives created false personas, Facebook pages, Twitter accounts, and even staged events that appeared to be organized by grassroots American groups (Mueller, 2019).

Another core feature is the widespread use of disinformation and memetic warfare. Ascott (2020) notes that while internet memes may appear harmless, memetic warfare involves the deliberate circulation of false or misleading content to polarize populations or erode trust in institutions (Marwick & Lewis, 2017). A popular meme, Pepe the Frog is a green anthropomorphic frog usually portrayed with a humanoid body wearing a blue T-shirt. Originally apolitical, it expressed simple emotions like sadness and joy. The symbol was appropriated by the alt-right (alternate-right), a far-right white nationalist movement. During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, some alt-right and white nationalist groups co-opted Pepe for propaganda, using edited versions to spread hateful or extremist messages. Another common meme, the NPC Wojak is an expressionless, grey-headed figure with a blank stare, a triangular nose, and a neutral mouth. NPC is an acronym for non-player characters, a term derived from video games. The NPC Wojak meme first appeared in 2018 to mock groups seen as conformist. The NPC meme gained traction before the 2018 U.S. midterm elections amid right-wing outrage over alleged social media censorship. Conservatives used it to portray liberals as unthinking “bots,” meaning individuals who lack internal monologue, unquestioningly accept authority, engage in groupthink, or adopt positions that reflect conformity and obedience.

The most insidious aspect of virtual politics lies in data-driven psychological manipulation. Social media and other platforms collect vast amounts of personal data that is used for targeted marketing and psychological persuasion. This shift from persuasion to manipulation erodes the foundation of informed democratic decision-making. Moreover, the performative nature of online political engagement often reduces participation to reactive, emotionally charged interactions, such as likes, shares, and outrage, instead of reasoned deliberation or civic dialogue (Sunstein, 2017).

 

Narrative Dominance and Virtual Politics

Narrative dominance refers to the phenomenon in which a particular storyline, interpretation, or framework becomes the prevailing lens through which events and realities are understood and perceived. It reflects the power to shape meaning, frame discourse, and control the perceived legitimacy of knowledge or truth. A contemporary example of narrative dominance is China’s global media campaign to reshape global perception of its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, deflect blame, criticize Western failures, spread alternative origin theories, and suppress dissenting domestic narratives (Zhou & Zhang, 2021).

 

In media, politics, and culture, dominant narratives can marginalize alternative viewpoints and solidify ideological control. In the digital age, virtual politics is a key arena in which narrative dominance is exercised and contested. Virtual politics involves the creation and circulation of curated realities that prioritize perception over policy or truth and thrive on controlling emotional responses and engagement.

 

Virtual Politics and Democracy

The consequences of information warfare, virtual politics, and narrative dominance for democracy are profound. Together, they result in diminished trust in public institutions and blur distinctions between reality and fiction. As digital platforms become the dominant venue for political communication, traditional forms of accountability —such as investigative journalism, public debate, and civic literacy —are weakened. In authoritarian regimes, virtual politics serve as a tool for controlling dissent while projecting a false image of openness. Even in democratic societies, the same tools sway elections, fragment publics, and distort political will (Bennett & Livingston, 2018). The challenge for democratic societies, then, is to develop regulatory, technological, and civic strategies to counteract the manipulative aspects of virtual politics without undermining legitimate political speech.

 

Narrative dominance in virtual politics involves creating an environment in which alternative realities are delegitimized or neglected. Narrative dominance reflects a shift from a politics of substance to a politics of spectacle and emotional resonance. Understanding this dynamic is essential for analyzing contemporary media landscapes, political behavior, and the challenges of democratic resilience in the digital era. Virtual politics is not merely about politics taking place online; it represents a fundamental transformation in how political reality is constructed, experienced, and contested. Because public life is mediated by screens, algorithms, and data, understanding the mechanics of virtual politics is critical to preserving democratic integrity and fostering genuine political engagement.

 

References

Ascott, T. (2020, February 16). How memes are becoming the new frontier of information warfare. The Strategist. https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/how-memes-are-becoming-the-new-frontier-of-information-warfare/

Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317

De’Alba, L. M. (2024, April 15). The virtual realities of politics: Entrenched narratives and political entertainment in the age of social media. Uttryck Magazine. https://www.uttryckmagazine.com/2024/04/15/the-virtual-realities-of-politics-entrenched-narratives-and-political-entertainment-in-the-age-of-social-media/

Gerbaudo, P. (2018). The digital party: Political organisation and online democracy. Pluto Press.

Isaak, J., & Hanna, M. J. (2018). User data privacy: Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, and privacy protection. Computer, 51(8), 56–59. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2018.3191268

Krastev, I. (2006). Virtual politics: Faking democracy in the post-Soviet world. In Post-Soviet Affairs, 22(1), 63–67.

Marwick, A., & Lewis, R. (2017). Media manipulation and disinformation online. Data & Society Research Institute. https://datasociety.net/library/media-manipulation-and-disinfo-online/

Mueller, R. S. (2019). Report on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. U.S. Department of Justice.

Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. Penguin.

Pomerantsev, P. (2019). This is not propaganda: Adventures in the war against reality. PublicAffairs.

Rid, T. (2020). Active measures: The secret history of disinformation and political warfare. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press.

Zhou, L., & Zhang, Y. (2021). China’s global propaganda push: COVID-19 and the strategic use of narrative. Journal of Contemporary China, 30(130), 611–628.

 

 

Data Literacy and Data Justice

 

 

By Lilian H. Hill

Data literacy is a fundamental skill set that entails the ability to read, write, understand, and communicate data in context effectively. It empowers individuals and organizations to derive meaning from data, make informed decisions, and solve problems. Data literacy is an interdisciplinary competency that integrates elements of mathematics, science, and information technology. Data literacy requires understanding data sources and constructs, analytical methods, and AI techniques (Stobierski, 2021). Data literacy is not about being a data scientist; it's about having a general understanding of data concepts and how to apply them effectively. 

The rapid expansion of digital information in today’s world has triggered a significant shift in how knowledge and skills are valued, making the ability to understand, interpret, and extract meaningful insights from data a vital competency. Schenck and Duschl (2024) comment that data increasingly drive decisions across all sectors of society, and promoting data literacy has become essential to preparing individuals to participate actively and thoughtfully in the digital age. In education, this changing environment calls for a reimagined approach that goes beyond conventional literacies, positioning data literacy as a core skill necessary for future success.

Skills of Data Literacy

Building data literacy skills is an essential process in today’s data-driven world. It begins with learning the fundamentals of data, including understanding different types such as quantitative versus qualitative data, and recognizing basic statistical concepts like mean, median, standard deviation, and correlation. Familiarity with common data formats (e.g., CSV, JSON, Excel files) lays the groundwork for deeper analytical work (Mandinach & Gummer, 2016). Introductory courses from platforms like Coursera or edX, as well as open-access tutorials and videos, offer accessible entry points for building this foundational knowledge.

To apply data literacy practically, individuals should become familiar with commonly used tools. Beginners might start with spreadsheets like Microsoft Excel or Google Sheets to learn basic data manipulation and chart creation. As comfort grows, they can explore more advanced platforms such as Tableau or Power BI for data visualization or learn coding languages like Python (using libraries such as Pandas) and SQL for deeper analysis. Practicing with real-world data available from open sources like government portals or World Bank Open Data helps bridge theory and application.

A crucial next step is learning to interpret data visualizations. Charts, graphs, and dashboards are the primary means of communicating data, and understanding how to read them critically is crucial for avoiding misinterpretation. Tools such as Gapminder or data stories from Our World in Data provide engaging ways to practice understanding patterns and trends visually (Knaflic, 2015).

Equally important is the development of critical thinking skills about data itself. This means asking questions such as: Where did the data come from? Is the sample size sufficient? Is there potential for bias or missing information? Cultivating skepticism and inquiry when reviewing data sources helps prevent the spread and influence of misinformation (Bhargava et al., 2021).

Communication is another fundamental part of data literacy. It’s not enough to understand data. The ability to clearly and ethically explain insights is equally important. This involves selecting appropriate visuals, simplifying complex ideas, and telling compelling data-driven stories (Knaflic, 2015). Platforms like Flourish or Datawrapper can help users experiment with design and narrative techniques that enhance data communication.

Ultimately, data literacy must be maintained and continually updated through ongoing learning. Schenk and Duschl (2024) call for a transformative change in educational practices, recommending a move away from formal, theory-first instruction toward contextual, inquiry-based learning. This change is viewed as crucial for equipping students with the practical skills necessary to apply data literacy effectively in real-world situations. Data literacy is not only a technical skill but also a civic and ethical one, enabling people to make informed decisions and engage in democratic processes.

Data Literacy and Social Justice

One of the core connections between big data analytics and data literacy lies in the ability to manage and critically evaluate the quality and relevance of data. Big data involves massive, unstructured datasets sourced from sensors, social media, transactional records, and more. This can introduce biases, inconsistencies, and privacy risks. Data-literate individuals are better equipped to ask critical questions: Where does the data come from? Is it representative? What algorithms are being applied? Who might be harmed by this analysis? These questions are especially important in fields like healthcare, criminal justice, education, and marketing, where big data can amplify existing societal inequities if not interpreted responsibly (boyd & Crawford, 2012).

Data justice aims to ensure that data practices do not perpetuate or exacerbate structural inequities and social injustices, but instead promote human rights, dignity, and democratic participation (Dencik & Sanchez-Monedero, 2022). The increasing dependence on data-driven technologies in all aspects of social life is a driving force behind major shifts in science, government, business, and civil society. While these changes are frequently promoted for their potential to improve efficiency and decision-making, they also introduce profound societal challenges. Data justice refers to the fair and equitable treatment of individuals and communities in the collection, analysis, use, and governance of data. It emphasizes that data are not neutral. How data are gathered, interpreted, and applied often reflect existing power structures, biases, and inequalities. Data justice has emerged as a critical framework for addressing these challenges through a lens centered on social justice. For example, if a predictive policing algorithm unfairly targets neighborhoods based on biased crime data, it may lead to over-policing in communities of color. A data justice approach would question the assumptions behind the data, advocate for community oversight, and explore alternative models that prioritize community safety without reinforcing systemic bias.

Finally, data literacy supports democratic participation in a big data society. As governments and corporations increasingly rely on data to guide decisions, including pandemic response, urban planning, and surveillance, citizens need the skills to engage with data-related policies, challenge unfair uses, and advocate for transparency and accountability. Without broad-based data literacy, power becomes concentrated in the hands of a few data-literate experts and institutions, potentially reinforcing social and economic inequalities (D’Ignazio & Klein, 2020).

References

Bhargava, R., Kadouaki, R., Bhargava, E., Castro, G., & D’Ignazio, C. (2021). Data murals: Using the arts to build data literacy. The Journal of Community Informatics, 17(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.15353/joci.v17i1.4602

boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878

Dencik, L., & Sanchez-Monedero, J. (2022). Data justice. Internet Policy Review, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.14763/2022.1.1615

D’Ignazio, C., & Klein, L. F. (2020). Data feminism. MIT Press.

Jones, B. (2025). Data literacy fundamentals: Understanding the power and value of data (2^nd ed.). Data Literacy Press.

Knaflic, C. N. (2015). Storytelling with data: A data visualization guide for business professionals. Wiley.

Mandinach, E. B., & Gummer, E. S. (2016). Data literacy for educators: Making it count in teacher preparation and practice. Teachers College Press.

Schenck, K. E., & Duschl, R. A. (2024). Context, language, and technology in data literacy. Routledge Open Research, 3(19).

            (https://doi.org/10.12688/routledgeopenres.18160.1)

Stobierski, T. (2021). Data literacy: An introduction for business. Harvard Business Review Online. https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/data-literacy

Taylor, L. (2017). What is data justice? The case for connecting digital rights and freedoms globally. Big Data & Society, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951717736335

 

Big Data and Job Opportunities

 

Image Credit: Alleksana on Pexels

By Lilian H. Hill

 

Big data refers to extremely large and complex datasets generated at high speed from a wide variety of sources, including social media, sensors, transactions, and mobile devices. These datasets are so vast and varied that traditional data processing tools cannot handle them efficiently; therefore, advanced technologies and analytics are required to extract meaningful insights. Due to its size and complexity, AI is being used to make sense of the data. However, Jones (2025) points out that we cannot abdicate our responsibility for making sense of data to machines. Instead, we need to identify the mistakes AI is making and the opportunities it is missing. Relating data literacy to big data underscores the importance of developing data analysis skills in today’s world. 

 

Big data is often characterized by the 5 Vs (Saeed & Husamaldin, 2021):

1. Volume: Refers to the massive amount of data generated every second from sensors, social media, transactions, and more that organizations must store, manage, and analyze.

2. Velocity: The speed at which data are generated, processed, and analyzed. Real-time or near-real-time data processing is crucial for making informed decisions promptly.

3. Variety: Describes the different types of data, including structured, semi-structured, and unstructured, such as text, images, videos, audio, and sensor data.

4. Veracity: Focuses on data quality, accuracy, and trustworthiness. Low veracity can lead to misleading insights if the data is incomplete, inconsistent, or biased.

5. Value: Emphasizes the importance of extracting meaningful and actionable insights from data to inform decisions and generate business or societal impact.

 

Some authors (Saeed & Husamaldin, 2021) refer to 8 or even 10 Vs and include:

6. Variability: Relates to data inconsistency and the changing meaning of data over time or across contexts. For example, the same word in different datasets may have different implications.

7. Visualization: Concerns how data are represented visually to enable human understanding and insight. Effective data visualization helps communicate complex patterns and support data-driven decisions.

8. Volatility: Refers to how long data remain relevant and how long it should be stored. Some data have a short shelf life and quickly lose value, requiring timely processing.

9. Validity: Refers to how accurately and appropriately data reflect what it is intended to measure or represent for a specific purpose. While it may seem like veracity, they are distinct concepts. A dataset can have high veracity, meaning it is trustworthy, yet still lack validity if it does not align with its intended application. Simply put, a dataset cannot be assumed to be suitable or reliable for decision-making without proper validation.

 

Wesson et al. (2022) propose an additional V relating to research ethics:

10. Virtuosity: Integrates frameworks of equity and justice. This includes analytical approaches to advancing equity, including social computational big data, fairness in machine learning algorithms, and data augmentation techniques. Wesson et al. (2022) emphasize the concept of data absenteeism, referring to who is left out of data collection and the role of positionality in shaping research outcomes. They further state that a fundamental aspect of any scientific endeavor is understanding both the methods used to collect or generate data and the disparities between the study population and the broader target population.

Big Data and Job Opportunities

Big Data presents both unprecedented opportunities and significant challenges. The demand for individuals who can critically and ethically navigate an information landscape characterized by its size and complexity is growing rapidly. The acceleration of digitalization has amplified the demand for digital competencies across various employment sectors. This trend is particularly evident in scientific fields, where employers increasingly seek candidates proficient in digital skills. A comprehensive analysis of 126,360 scientific job advertisements from Science Careers, spanning 2019 to 2023, highlights this shift (Zhang et al., 2024). The study reveals a consistent upward trajectory in the requirement for digital proficiencies, with higher-paying positions more frequently requiring such skills. Expertise in data analysis, statistics, and statistical software (e.g., Python, and R) has seen a growing demand, while traditional skills like data collection have become less critical.

This trend aligns with broader labor market projections. For instance, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2025) anticipates a 36% growth in data scientist roles from 2023 to 2033, driven by the increasing reliance on data-driven decision-making across industries. Similarly, the World Economic Forum (2025) forecasts a 30-35% rise in demand for roles such as data analysts and scientists, propelled by advancements in frontier technologies. These projections underscore the crucial importance of integrating digital skills into educational curricula to equip the future workforce for the evolving demands of the scientific and technological sectors. 

Data analytics is integral to various aspects of business operations, including informed decision-making, operational efficiency, customer understanding, competitive advantage, risk management, personalization, and innovation. By aligning curricula with these industry demands, educational institutions can prepare graduates to make effective contributions to data-driven strategies and innovations in their respective fields.

 

Big Data and Job Skills

Big data amplifies the importance of statistical reasoning and computational thinking, which are essential components of advanced data literacy. Machine learning and AI techniques used to analyze big data require users to understand how models are trained, what features are prioritized, and how predictions are generated. Without this understanding, users may misinterpret automated outputs as objective truth when, in fact, they may reflect biased or flawed assumptions embedded in the data (O’Neil, 2016).

Data visualization and storytelling are essential skills when working with large datasets. Given the overwhelming volume of information, the ability to distill meaningful patterns, trends, and insights through clear visuals becomes a necessary skill for decision-making in business, policy, and research. Tools such as Tableau, Power BI, and Python libraries (e.g., Seaborn, Matplotlib) make this possible, but their effective use requires both technical proficiency and ethical awareness.

Organizations generate increasing volumes of data daily, making the roles of data analysis and analytics pivotal in effectively managing and leveraging this information. Consequently, educational programs in data analysis and analytics must evolve to align with the industry's dynamic needs and meet professional expectations (Booker et al., 2024). In conclusion, the rise of big data transforms data literacy from a helpful skill into a critical form of digital citizenship. It enables individuals not only to work with complex information but also to scrutinize how data are collected, analyzed, and used. In a world where algorithms and data models increasingly drive decisions, widespread data literacy is essential to ensure that big data serves the public good rather than undermining it.

 

References

Booker, Q. E., Rebman, C. M., Wimmer, H., Levkoff, S. B., Powell, P. & Breese, J. L. (2024). Data analytics position description analysis: Skills review and implications for data analytics curricula. Information Systems Education Journal, 22(3), 76–87.

Jones, B. (2025). Data literacy fundamentals: Understanding the power and value of data (2^nd ed.). Data Literacy Press.

Saeed, N. & Husamaldin, L. (2021). Big data characteristics (V’s) in industry. Iraqi Journal of Industrial Research, 8, 1-9. 10.53523/ijoirVol8I1ID52.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2025, April 18). Fastest growing occupations. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/fastest-growing.htm

World Economic Forum (2025, January 7). Future of Jobs 2025. https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2025/

Zhang, G., Wang, L. Shang, F. & Wang, X. (2024): What are the digital skills sought by scientific employers in potential candidates? Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 47(1), 20-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2024.2374392

 

 

Information Literacy as a Career Survival Skill

 

By Lilian H. Hill

Released by the World Economic Forum on January 7, 2025, the Future of Jobs Report 2025 draws on insights from over 1,000 leading global employers, representing more than 14 million workers across 22 industry sectors and 55 economies worldwide, to explore how major global trends are shaping the future of jobs and skills. It also outlines the workforce transformation strategies these employers intend to pursue between 2025 and 2030 in response to these shifts. The World Economic Forum brings together leaders from politics, business, academia, civil society, and other sectors to shape global, regional, and industry agendas. Founded in 1971 as a non-profit organization, it operates independently and impartially, free from special interests, and is committed to the highest standards of governance, ethical conduct, and intellectual integrity (World Economic Forum, n.d.). This is the fifth edition of the Future of Jobs report published since 2016. 

The Future of Jobs Report 2025 explains how information literacy is understood in today’s rapidly evolving and uncertain labor market. Traditionally, information literacy referred to the ability to locate, evaluate, and effectively use information. The report emphasizes the need for a more comprehensive and adaptable understanding that incorporates digital discernment, data literacy, and critical thinking in an increasingly automated and data-driven world. AI literacy, data analytics, cybersecurity, and creative problem-solving are critical skillsets in demand, and employees will need to make adaptability a core strength.

As roles in artificial intelligence (AI), data analysis, sustainability, and digital transformation become more prominent, individuals must develop the ability to critically assess the accuracy, credibility, and implications of the information they consume, particularly in a media environment where misinformation, technological hype, and biased algorithms are widespread. The image below displays the top 10 skills identified by the Future of Jobs 2025 report as desirable from now until 2030.

 

The report emphasizes that skills-based hiring is on the rise, with employers placing more value on demonstrable competencies than on formal credentials. This trend reinforces the importance of self-directed learning, where workers are expected to acquire and apply new knowledge to remain competitive continually. With nearly 40% of current job skills expected to shift by 2030, the ability to access and interpret relevant information becomes a crucial career survival skill, enabling individuals to identify trusted educational platforms, evaluate online learning resources, and stay current with evolving industry standards.

The growing complexity and opacity of emerging technologies heighten the need for technological and ethical literacy. As AI, big data, and algorithmic decision-making become embedded in areas such as hiring, education, policing, and healthcare, the public must be equipped to ask critical questions: Who designed these systems? What data were they trained on? Who is accountable if things go wrong? Information literacy thus plays a central role in helping individuals and communities not only use digital tools but also critically examine their fairness, transparency, and societal impact.

The report reinforces the role of information literacy in civic engagement. As AI and other technologies increasingly influence public decision-making, including resource allocation, predictive policing, and climate-related infrastructure planning, citizens must be able to participate meaningfully in public consultations, policy debates, and democratic processes. This requires the ability to interpret technical and policy-related information, challenge unjust practices, and propose alternatives rooted in equity and inclusion. In this way, information literacy supports informed citizenship in a digital democracy.

Finally, the report emphasizes the urgent need to bridge the digital divide, noting that without equitable access to learning tools and information resources, existing inequalities are likely to persist and widen. Individuals from underserved communities face disproportionate barriers to acquiring in-demand skills, which can perpetuate cycles of economic exclusion. Embedding information literacy into education systems, workforce development programs, and community initiatives is essential to ensure that everyone, not just the digitally privileged, can participate in and benefit from the changing world of work.

In summary, the Future of Jobs Report 2025 frames information literacy as a multidimensional and indispensable skill in the era of rapid technological change. It is no longer sufficient to know how to find information; individuals must be able to evaluate its quality, apply it to real-world challenges, and use it to advocate for fair and ethical practices. Information literacy is thus positioned as a foundational competency for lifelong learning, career resilience, civic empowerment, and social equity in the digital age.

References

World Economic Forum (n.d.) Our Mission. https://www.weforum.org/about/world-economic-forum/

World Economic Forum (2025, January 7). Future of Jobs 2025. https://www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2025/

 

Data Rights and Digital Hegemony

 

By Lilian H. Hill

The internet was once imagined as a democratic digital common; however, that notion has been rendered idealistic (Shurety, 2021). Today, mainstream internet use is predominantly governed by a handful of powerful corporations, signaling that cyberspace has also undergone significant privatization. Digital hegemony refers to dominance exercised by a small group of powerful technology companies and states over the digital infrastructure, norms, and data flows that shape global information ecosystems. This form of control extends beyond simple market power; it encompasses the ability to set standards, influence public discourse, and dictate the rules of engagement in cyberspace. Much like cultural or economic hegemony shapes societal values and resource distribution, digital hegemony influences how knowledge is produced, circulated, and monetized, often with limited transparency and accountability.

Digital hegemony intersects directly with data rights, meaning individuals’ and communities’ control over how their personal and collective data are collected, stored, used, and shared. Although AI tools may appear to generate content out of thin air, generative AI systems are built and trained on vast datasets, drawing from extensive collections of images, text, and audio. These systems rely on billions of parameters shaped by complex algorithms that analyze and learn from massive archives of digital information.

In a digitally hegemonic landscape, data are frequently extracted without meaningful consent and commodified by dominant actors, reinforcing asymmetries of power. Citizens often have little recourse or understanding of how their data shape algorithmic decisions, advertising profiles, or political targeting. As scholars like Shoshana Zuboff (2019) argue in The Age of Surveillance Capitalism, this unchecked exploitation of data amounts to a new form of dispossession. Advocating for data rights—including the right to access, delete, and control one's data—is therefore essential to challenging digital hegemony and restoring individuals’ democratic agency.

Monetizing Data

In the digital age, data have become a central asset. Personal information is collected, analyzed, and monetized by both corporations and governments. The commodification of personal data has given rise to growing concerns about privacy, surveillance, and individual autonomy. The concept of data rights has emerged as a response to these concerns, advocating for individuals’ control over their personal information. Verhulst (2022) emphasizes the need for digital self-determination, where individuals have the agency to decide how their data are used and shared. Likewise, Huang and Siddarth (2023) discuss the importance of protecting the digital commons, suggesting that generative AI models trained on public data should contribute back to the communities from which they draw.

The digital realm is also susceptible to more insidious forms of power consolidation. The term digital coup has been used to describe situations where digital platforms or technologies are leveraged to undermine democratic processes. A notable example is Meta's (formerly Facebook) response to Canada's Bill C-18, which aimed to ensure fair compensation for news content shared on digital platforms. In retaliation, Meta restricted access to news content for Canadian users, effectively using its platform's dominance to challenge governmental authority (MacArthur, 2023). Such actions highlight the immense power wielded by tech giants and the potential threats they pose to democratic institutions.

In more extreme cases, digital tools have been employed to facilitate governmental overthrows or suppress dissent. The 2021 military coup in Myanmar saw the junta implementing internet shutdowns, surveillance, and censorship to control the narrative and stifle opposition (Coppel & Chang, 2024). These tactics exemplify how digital technologies can be weaponized to consolidate power and suppress democratic movements. The international community must recognize and address these challenges to safeguard democratic values in the digital era.

Preserving Data Rights

Preserving data rights involves ensuring individuals have meaningful control over how their personal information is collected, used, and shared in digital environments. Legal frameworks play a foundational role in this effort. For example, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provides comprehensive protection, including the rights to access, correct, delete, and restrict the processing of personal data (European Commission, 2016). Similarly, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) empowers consumers to know what personal information is being collected and to opt out of its sale (California Civil Code § 1798.100, 2018).

Beyond legislation, preserving data rights requires implementing technical and organizational strategies such as privacy by design, where data protection measures are integrated into the development of systems and technologies from the outset (Cavoukian, 2009; Solove, 2025). Another critical principle is data minimization, which means collecting only the data necessary for a specific purpose, thereby reducing the risks of misuse or unauthorized access. Additionally, increasing public awareness and digital literacy helps individuals make informed choices and assert their rights more effectively. Together, legal, technical, and educational approaches form a multi-layered strategy for upholding data rights in the digital age.

Counteracting Digital Hegemony

Counteracting digital hegemony involves resisting the concentrated power that dominant technology corporations and states hold over digital infrastructures, platforms, and user data. Digital hegemony allows a few powerful actors—often multinational tech companies like Google, Meta, and Amazon—to control the flow of information, shape public discourse, and exploit user data for economic and political gain (Couldry & Mejias, 2019). This monopolization raises concerns about surveillance, censorship, and the erosion of democratic processes. To counteract these trends, various strategies have emerged. These include promoting open-source technologies and decentralized networks that reduce dependency on corporate-owned platforms (Zuboff, 2019), enforcing antitrust regulations and data protection laws (Birhane, 2021), and enhancing digital literacy to empower users to navigate and critically engage with online systems (Hintz et al., 2018). Furthermore, advocating for digital sovereignty—where communities and nations assert control over their digital infrastructure and data—is a critical step toward reducing reliance on foreign or corporate technologies (Tomasello, 2023). Ultimately, counteracting digital hegemony involves redistributing digital power, protecting civil liberties, and promoting a more inclusive and equitable digital ecosystem.

 

References

Birhane, A. (2021). Algorithmic injustice: A relational ethics approach. Patterns, 2(2), 100205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2021.100205

Brush, H. (2003). Electronic civil disobedience. In Encyclopedia of new media (pp. 167-168). SAGE Publications, Inc., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412950657.n86

California Civil Code § 1798.100. (2018). California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018. https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/civil-code/civ-sect-1798-100/

Coppel, N., & Chang, L. Y. C. (2024). Coup #4: February 2021 and after. In Myanmar’s digital coup (pp. 23–45). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-58645-3_2SpringerLink

Cavoukian, A. (2009). Privacy by Design: The 7 foundational principles. Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario. https://www.ipc.on.ca/sites/default/files/legacy/2018/01/pbd-1.pdf

Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). The costs of connection: How data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism. Stanford University Press.

European Commission. (2016). General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj

Hintz, A., Dencik, L., & Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2018). Digital citizenship in a datafied society. Polity Press.

Huang, S., & Siddarth, D. (2023). Generative AI and the Digital Commons. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.11074arXiv

MacArthur, J. R. (2023, October 1). A Digital Coup. Harper’s Magazine. https://harpers.org/2023/10/a-digital-coup/Harper's Magazine

Shurety, E. (2021, June 17). What happened to electronic civil disobedience? Hyperallergic. https://hyperallergic.com/654595/what-happened-to-electronic-civil-disobedience/

Solove, D. J. (2021). Understanding privacy. Harvard University Press.

Tomasello, F. Digital civics and algorithmic citizenship in a global scenario. Philos. Technol. 36, 39 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00638-3

Verhulst, S. G. (2022). Operationalizing digital self determination. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.08539arXiv

Wikipedia contributors. (2025). Electronic civil disobedience. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_civil_disobedienceWikipedia

Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.

Polarization of News Consumption and Narrative Warfare

Image Credit: Jhefferson Santos at Pexels

By Lilian H. Hill

 

The concepts of polarized news consumption, narrative warfare, and information literacy are interconnected in today’s complex media and geopolitical environment. News consumption in modern democratic societies is increasingly polarized, with individuals gravitating toward sources that affirm their existing political beliefs. This behavior fosters ideological echo chambers where alternative viewpoints are seldom encountered, reinforcing confirmation bias and intensifying societal divisions. The proliferation of digital media has amplified this trend. Algorithms on platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, and Google promote engagement by recommending content similar to users' prior behavior, creating what Pariser (2011) describes as “filter bubbles.” Within these insulated media environments, divergent perspectives are not only underrepresented but often distorted or dismissed.

 

This fragmentation undermines a shared public reality—a critical foundation for democratic discourse. Lewandowsky et al. (2017) argue that such environments contribute to a "post-truth" era, in which emotional resonance and identity-aligned narratives prevail over factual accuracy. Misinformation thrives under these conditions, particularly when it reinforces group identities or vilifies out-groups. In these polarized spaces, falsehoods are often not only believed but actively defended, while fact-checking is dismissed as partisan, hindering consensus on crucial issues such as climate change, public health, and election integrity.

 

Partisan media often rely on emotionally and morally charged framing that casts societal issues in stark, binary terms. This framing appeals to deeply held values and group affiliations, prompting individuals to process information through the lens of loyalty rather than reasoned evaluation. As Fricker (2007) explains, this dynamic can lead to epistemic injustice, where individuals are denied fair access to knowledge or their viewpoints are discredited due to identity-based bias. What this emotionally charged representation does not accomplish is to represent the complexity of human life. As a result, public trust in media institutions erodes, and journalism is increasingly perceived not as a truth-seeking endeavor but as a tool for ideological influence.

 

Narrative warfare involves the strategic deployment of stories, symbols, and messages by both state and non-state actors to sway public opinion, legitimize authority, and manipulate public perception. These narratives are disseminated across various platforms, including news outlets, social media, entertainment, and even memes, and often capitalize on existing cultural tensions and ideological rifts (Woolley & Howard, 2019; Miskimmon et al., 2013). In this context, information literacy is a vital civic defense, enabling individuals to assess sources critically, recognize propaganda, and understand the motivations behind messaging campaigns. It also fosters resilience against disinformation, ideologically loaded narratives, and emotionally manipulative content (Mihailidis & Viotty, 2017).

 

Without adequate information literacy, individuals are more vulnerable to misleading stories that provoke fear, anger, or resentment. For instance, during political campaigns or armed conflicts, strategic narratives may be used to legitimize aggression, suppress opposition, or delegitimize dissenting voices (Rid, 2020). These efforts are further magnified by digital algorithms that prioritize sensational content to drive engagement. Consequently, information literacy must extend to digital environments, encompassing an understanding of how platforms function, how algorithms shape content visibility, and how personal data is used for targeted messaging (Gorwa, 2019).

 

Relationship Between Polarization and Narrative Warfare

Polarization and narrative warfare have a reciprocal relationship. In polarized contexts, where institutional trust is low, audiences are more likely to accept narratives that reinforce their worldview and portray others in a negative light. Simultaneously, polarization fosters information disorder, as individuals actively seek out confirmatory content and dismiss contradictory information. Narrative warfare exploits societal divides, using emotionally charged, ideologically targeted messaging to deepen mistrust and entrench ideological silos (Miskimmon et al., 2013; Wardle & Derakhshan, 2017). Social media amplifies this cycle, enabling rapid dissemination of emotionally engaging narratives that further fracture public discourse (Tucker et al., 2018; Rid, 2020).

 

Counteracting Polarization and Narrative Warfare

To address the rising threat of disinformation and digital manipulation, interventions must span education, platform accountability, and public policy. Media and information literacy (MIL) is a frontline defense; studies confirm that MIL helps users identify misinformation, understand algorithmic bias, and develop civic agency (Siegel-Stechler, 2025). Educators and policymakers are increasingly advocating for the integration of MIL in curricula to build long-term societal resilience. In parallel, platforms must take responsibility for transparency in content moderation and algorithmic recommendation systems, a point echoed in regulatory efforts like the EU Digital Services Act (DSA), which mandates transparency reporting for very large platforms (European Commission, 2024).

 

Narrative warfare—the strategic deployment of emotionally resonant stories to distort public understanding—requires not only fact-checking but counter-narratives that engage audiences meaningfully. Bateman and Jackson (2024) argue that effective counter-disinformation strategies combine fact-based messaging with emotionally grounded storytelling tailored to community values. Researchers also warn that algorithmic amplification contributes to political polarization and narrative fragmentation, and advocate for friction-based design (e.g., content warnings, speed bumps) to slow the viral spread of falsehoods. At the policy level, multi-stakeholder approaches, combining regulation, civil society initiatives, and platform cooperation, are essential for defending democratic discourse and reducing the systemic incentives that sustain disinformation ecosystems.

 

Conclusion
In an era marked by deep political divides and the weaponization of information, building robust information literacy is not just an individual skill but a democratic imperative. The interplay between polarization and narrative warfare highlights the urgent need to cultivate critical thinking, media literacy, and intercultural dialogue. Critical thinking enables meaningful participation in public discourse, equips people to resist manipulative narratives, and supports a healthier, more informed democratic culture. Empowering individuals to navigate complex information ecosystems, recognize manipulative storytelling, and engage constructively with diverse perspectives is crucial for preserving democratic values, fostering social cohesion, and maintaining an informed public sphere.

 

References

Bateman, J., & Jackson, D. (2024, January 31). "Countering Disinformation Effectively: An Evidence-Based Policy Guide." Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/01/countering-disinformation-effectively-an-evidence-based-policy-guide?lang=en

Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.

Euopean Commission (2024, July 25. The Digital Services Act package. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-services-act-package

Gorwa, R. (2019). The platform governance triangle: Conceptualizing the informal regulation of online content. Internet Policy Review, 8(2).

Hobbs, R. (2021). Mind over media: Propaganda education for a digital age. W. W. Norton.

Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the "post-truth" era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 353–369.

Mihailidis, P., & Viotty, S. (2017). Spreadable spectacle in digital culture: Civic expression, fake news, and the role of media literacies in "post-fact" society. American Behavioral Scientist, 61(4), 441–454.

Miskimmon, A., O’Loughlin, B., & Roselle, L. (2013). Strategic narratives: Communication power and the new world order. Routledge.

Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. Penguin Press.

Rid, T. (2020). Active measures: The secret history of disinformation and political warfare. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Siegel-Stechler, K., Hilton, K., & Medina, A. (2025, May 12). Youth Rely on Digital Platforms and Need Media Literacy. Center for Media Information for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. Tufts University. https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/youth-rely-digital-platforms-need-media-literacy-access-political-information

Tucker, J. A., Guess, A., Barbera, P., Vaccari, C., Siegel, A., Sanovich, S., ... & Nyhan, B. (2018). Social media, political polarization, and political disinformation: A review of the scientific literature. Hewlett Foundation.

 Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Council of Europe.