Digital Architecture of Disinformation

 

By Lilian H. Hill

 

Fake news and disinformation are not new, but their rapid spread is unprecedented. Many individuals struggle to distinguish between real and fake news online, leading to widespread confusion (Hetler, 2025). Disinformation architecture refers to the systematic and strategic methods used to create, spread, and amplify false or misleading information. It involves a combination of technology, human effort, and coordinated tactics to manipulate public opinion, sow discord, or achieve specific political or social goals. This architecture leverages technology, social networks, and psychological manipulation to shape public perception, influence behavior, or achieve specific objectives, such as political, financial, or ideological gains.

 

In the last few decades, Gal (2024) stated that social media platforms have transformed from basic networking sites into influential entities that shape public opinion, sway elections, impact public health, and influence social cohesion. For example, during the recent U.S. presidential election, platforms like X played a key role in disseminating accurate information and misinformation, mobilizing voters, and affecting turnout. Likewise, during the COVID-19 pandemic, social media was instrumental in sharing public health guidelines but also became a hotspot for the spread of misinformation regarding vaccines and treatments.

 

Bossetta (2024) stated that a platform's digital architecture influences political communication on social media, meaning the technical frameworks that facilitate, restrict, and shape user behavior online. This generally refers to what platforms enable, prevent, and structure online communication, such as through likes, comments, retweets, and sharing. Ong and Cabañes (2018) commented that the basic blueprint of political disinformation campaigns strongly resembles corporate branding strategy. However, political disinformation requires its purveyors to make moral compromises, including distributing revisionist history, silencing political opponents, and hijacking news media attention.

 

The primary goals of disinformation campaigns are political manipulation, social division, economic gains, and the erosion of trust in institutions such as the media, science, and democracy. Their impacts are far-reaching, leading to increased polarization, manipulation of democratic processes, reputational damage, and harm to individuals' mental well-being (Bossetta, 2018).

 

Influence of Disinformation Architecture

Disinformation has far-reaching consequences, including the erosion of trust in key institutions such as journalism, science, and governance. By spreading misleading narratives, it undermines public confidence in credible sources of information. Additionally, disinformation fuels polarization by deepening societal divisions and promoting extreme or one-sided perspectives, making constructive dialogue more difficult. It also plays a significant role in manipulating democracies, influencing elections and policy debates through deceptive tactics that mislead voters and policymakers. Beyond its societal impacts, disinformation can cause direct harm to individuals by targeting their reputations, personal safety, and mental well-being, often leading to harassment, misinformation-driven fear, and public distrust.

 

Components of Disinformation Architecture

Disinformation architecture consists of several key components that manipulate public perception. It begins with reconnaissance, where the target audience and environment are analyzed to tailor the disinformation campaign effectively. Once this understanding is established, the necessary infrastructure is built, including creating believable personas, social media accounts, and groups to disseminate false information. Content creation follows, ensuring a continuous flow of misleading materials such as posts, memes, videos, and articles that support the disinformation narrative.

 

The core aspects of disinformation architecture include content creation, amplification channels, psychological tactics, targeting and segmentation, infrastructure support, and feedback loops. Content creation involves fabricating fake news, manipulating media, and employing deepfake technology to mislead audiences. Amplification is achieved through social media platforms, bot networks, and echo chambers that reinforce biased narratives. Psychological tactics exploit emotions, cognitive biases, and perceived authority to gain trust and engagement. Targeting and segmentation enable microtargeting strategies, exploiting demographic vulnerabilities to maximize influence. Infrastructure support includes data harvesting, dark web resources, and monetization channels that sustain disinformation campaigns. Feedback loops ensure that engagement algorithms prioritize viral and sensationalist content, keeping misinformation in circulation.

 

Amplification is crucial in spreading this content widely, utilizing bots, algorithms, and social-engineering techniques to maximize reach. Engagement is then sustained through interactions that deepen the impact of disinformation, often through trolling or disruptive tactics. Eventually, mobilization occurs, where unwitting users are encouraged to take action, leading to real-world consequences.

 

Mitigation of Disinformation Architecture

To mitigate disinformation, several strategies must be implemented. Regulation and policy measures should enforce platform transparency rules and penalize the deliberate spread of harmful content. According to Gal (2024), because social media platforms play an increasingly central role in information dissemination, ensuring the integrity of that information has become more urgent than ever, making discussions about regulation essential. Given their profound influence on nearly every aspect of society, these platforms should be treated as critical infrastructure—like energy grids and water supply systems—and subject to the same level of scrutiny and regulation to safeguard information integrity. Just as a power grid failure can cause widespread disruption, large-scale social media manipulation can erode democratic processes, hinder public health initiatives, and weaken social trust.

 

Technological solutions like AI-driven detection systems and verification tools can help identify and flag false information. Public awareness efforts should promote media literacy, encouraging individuals to critically evaluate information and question sensationalist narratives (Hetler, 2025). Finally, platform responsibility must be strengthened by modifying algorithms to prioritize credible sources and enhancing content moderation to limit the spread of disinformation. Understanding these mechanisms is essential to developing effective countermeasures against the growing threat of disinformation in the digital age.

 

References

Bossetta, M. (2018). The digital architectures of social media: Comparing political campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. election, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(2), 471–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018763307

Bossetta, M. (2024, October 16). Digital architecture, social engineering, and networked disinformation on social media. EU Disinfo Lab. Retrieved https://www.disinfo.eu/outreach/our-webinars/webinar-digital-architectures-social-engineering-and-networked-disinformation-with-michael-bossetta/

Gal, U. (2024, November 17). Want to combat online misinformation? Regulate the architecture of social media platforms, not their content. ABC. Retrieved https://www.abc.net.au/religion/uri-gal-online-misinformation-democracy-social-media-algorithms/104591278

Hetler, A. (2025, January 7). 11 ways to spot disinformation on social media. TechTarget. Retrieved https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/feature/10-ways-to-spot-disinformation-on-social-media

Ong, J. C., & Cabañes, J. V. A. (2018). The architecture of networked disinformation: Behind the scenes of troll accounts and fake news production in the Philippines. The Newton Tech4Dev Network. Retrieved https://newtontechfordev.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ARCHITECTS-OF-NETWORKED-DISINFORMATION-FULL-REPORT.pdf

Artistic and Creative Literacy

Treeline by Lilian H. Hill

By Lilian H. Hill

Artistic and creative literacy refers to understanding, appreciating, and effectively engaging with various forms of artistic expression and creativity. It describes the capacity to engage with works of art personally and meaningfully, fostering a deeper connection to our own humanity and that of others. The National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (2014) states that “artistic literacy is the knowledge and understanding required to participate authentically in the arts.” Artistic and creative literacy should be available to everyone instead of the talented few.

 

Skills and Competencies

Artistic and creative literacy encompasses various skills and competencies that enable individuals to interpret, create, and communicate through artistic mediums. Artistic and creative literacy means you can understand and appreciate art and create and express yourself through artistic means. It involves understanding the elements and principles of art and the historical, cultural, and social contexts under which the art was created. 

 

At its core, artistic and creative literacy involves comprehending the language of art, including its visual, auditory, and tactile elements. This includes understanding concepts such as composition, color theory, rhythm, and symbolism. It also involves being able to analyze and critique artistic works, recognizing their cultural, historical, and societal significance. Furthermore, artistic and creative literacy entails expressing oneself creatively through various mediums such as visual arts, music, literature, theater, dance, and multimedia. This involves technical proficiency, imagination, originality, and innovation to generate innovative ideas and forms of expression.

 

Artistic and creative literacy is not limited to the creation and appreciation of art but extends to the ability to communicate and collaborate effectively through creative means. This includes using artistic expression to convey ideas, emotions, and experiences and working collaboratively with others to generate innovative solutions to complex problems. For example, The Berkshire Regional Arts Integration Network provides teachers with downloadable handouts that specify and define the elements of drama, style, design, music, storytelling, visual style, poetry, and creative movement. There are specific lessons attached to each of these art forms.

 

Relationship Between Artistic and Creative Literacy and Information Literacy
Artistic and creative literacy and information literacy are closely related concepts that complement each other in the broader landscape of education and intellectual development. In today's rapidly changing world, artistic and creative literacy is increasingly recognized as a vital skill that fosters critical thinking, empathy, adaptability, and resilience. It empowers individuals to navigate diverse cultural landscapes, express their identities, and contribute to the enrichment of society through artistic innovation and creative expression.

 

Information literacy involves identifying, locating, evaluating, and effectively using information across various formats and platforms. It encompasses skills such as critically assessing sources, synthesizing information, and ethically using and sharing information. Information literacy is essential in today's information-rich society, enabling individuals to make informed decisions, solve problems, and participate meaningfully in civic and professional contexts.

 

The relationship between artistic and creative literacy and information literacy lies in their shared emphasis on critical thinking, communication, and creativity:

• Critical Thinking: Both artistic and creative literacy and information literacy require critical thinking skills. Individuals critically analyze artistic works, interpret their meanings, and evaluate their effectiveness in artistic and creative contexts. Similarly, in information literacy, individuals critically evaluate sources, assess their credibility and relevance, and synthesize information to generate new insights.
• Communication: Artistic and creative literacy and information literacy involve effective communication skills. Through artistic expression, individuals communicate ideas, emotions, and experiences using various mediums. Information literacy also involves effective communication, whether articulating research findings, presenting information to an audience, or engaging in collaborative discourse.
• Creativity: Creativity is central to artistic and creative and information literacy. In artistic and creative contexts, individuals harness their imagination and originality to produce innovative works of art and expression. Similarly, in information literacy, individuals apply creative thinking to solve problems, generate new ideas, and communicate information engaging and compellingly.
• Research Skills: Artistic and creative literacy and information literacy require strong research skills. In artistic and creative endeavors, individuals may research historical contexts, explore artistic techniques, or study the works of other artists. In information literacy, individuals conduct research to gather relevant information, assess its reliability, and integrate it into their creative projects or scholarly pursuits.

 

Artistic and creative literacy and information literacy are interconnected domains supporting holistic learning and intellectual growth. By cultivating proficiency in both areas, individuals can develop a well-rounded skill set that empowers them to navigate diverse challenges, express themselves creatively, and contribute meaningfully to society.

 

References

Berkshire Regional Arts Integration Framework (2020). Elements of artistic literacy. Brainworks. Retrieved https://www.brainworks.mcla.edu/elementspages

 National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (2014). A conceptual framework for arts learning. Retrieved https://www.nationalartsstandards.org/sites/default/files/Conceptual%20Framework%2007-21-16.pdf

The Relationship Between Information Literacy and Social Epistemology

 

 

By Lilian H. Hill

Examining the relationship between information literacy and social epistemology is important for developing critical thinking, making informed decisions, and participating effectively in society. Exploring these ideas together enhances educational outcomes, professional capabilities, and personal growth while also addressing broader societal challenges like misinformation and social justice. By delving into these areas, individuals and communities can foster a more informed, equitable, and dynamic knowledge landscape.

 

Definitions

• Information literacy is the skills and abilities needed to effectively find, evaluate, use, and communicate the huge amount of information available today. It includes recognizing credible sources, critical thinking, and understanding the ethical uses of information. In other words, information literacy is the set of integrated abilities encompassing the reflective discovery of information, the understanding of how information is produced and valued, and the use of information in creating new knowledge and participating ethically in communities of learning.

• Epistemology is the study of knowledge, meaning the philosophical basis of how we know what we know or think we know. The ultimate test of whether information is true or false is an epistemological question.

• Social epistemology is a subfield that focuses on the social dimensions of knowledge acquisition and dissemination. Social epistemology provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the social aspects of knowledge, highlighting the importance of collective practices, institutions, and power dynamics in shaping what we know and how we know it. It bridges the gap between individual cognition and social processes, offering valuable insights into the complex interplay between knowledge and society.

• Knowledge construction is how individuals and groups develop and organize knowledge through experiences, interactions, and reflections. It involves actively integrating new information with existing cognitive structures, resulting in a deeper understanding and refined perspectives. This process is dynamic and ongoing, influenced by various cognitive, social, cultural, and contextual factors.

Key Concepts in Social Epistemology

Social epistemology involves the “mental choices involved in shaping knowledge, the sources of evidence for those choices, the evaluation of outcomes of those choices, and the types of actors involved in the choices” (Nord, 2019, p. 3). Unlike traditional epistemology, which primarily concerns individual knowers and isolated knowledge claims, social epistemology examines the collective processes, practices, and institutions that contribute to developing and spreading knowledge within a community or society. Social epistemology explores how individuals can most effectively seek the truth, either with the assistance of or despite other people, social practices, and institutions (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2024).

• Collective Knowledge: Social epistemology investigates how groups, rather than individuals, contribute to and possess knowledge. This includes exploring how collaborative efforts, shared resources, and communal practices enhance or hinder knowledge production.

• Testimony: Testimony refers to acquiring knowledge through the reports or accounts of others. Social epistemology examines the reliability and significance of testimony, considering factors like trust, credibility, and the social mechanisms that support or undermine it.

• Epistemic Communities: These are groups that share common epistemic goals, methods, and standards. Social epistemology studies how these communities form, operate, and impact the broader knowledge landscape.

• Division of Cognitive Labor involves the specialization and distribution of epistemic tasks among different individuals or groups, acknowledging that no single person can master all knowledge domains. Social epistemologists explore how such division enhances or complicates knowledge production.

• Peer Disagreement: This concept deals with how individuals should respond to disagreements with peers, especially those considered epistemic equals. It explores the implications of such disagreements for individual belief revision and collective knowledge practices.

• Epistemic Injustice: Coined by philosopher Miranda Fricker (2007), this term refers to wrongs done to individuals in their capacity as knowers. It includes concepts like testimonial injustice (when someone’s word is given less credibility due to prejudice) and hermeneutical injustice (when someone’s social experience is obscured from collective understanding due to structural prejudices).

Critiques and Challenges

Some critics argue that emphasizing the social dimensions of knowledge can lead to relativism, where the truth is seen as contingent on social or cultural contexts. Social epistemologists respond by distinguishing between socially influenced knowledge practices and the objective nature of certain knowledge claims. The role of authority and power in knowledge production and dissemination raises concerns about potential biases and injustices. Social epistemologists critically examine how power dynamics shape who gets to be recognized as a knower and whose knowledge is valued. Balancing the benefits of epistemic diversity with the need for coherent and reliable knowledge practices is an ongoing challenge. Social epistemologists explore how diverse perspectives can be integrated into a cohesive epistemic framework.

 

Information Literacy and Social Epistemology: Shared Focus Areas and Complementary Insights

Social epistemology and information literacy are closely related fields that together provide a comprehensive understanding of how individuals and communities engage with information to construct knowledge. The table below provides an explanation of their relationship in terms of their shared focus areas (source evaluation, critical thinking, and the role of testimony) and complementary insights (context, ethical considerations, and knowledge construction):

 

	Social Epistemology	Information Literacy
	Shared Focus Areas
Source Evaluation	Analyzes how social factors like trust, credibility, and authority affect the evaluation of information sources.	Teaches individuals to critically assess credibility and reliability of information sources, including understanding biases and identifying authoritative voices.
Critical Thinking	Encourages critical examination of how social influences, such as power dynamics and institutional practices, shape knowledge.	Promotes critical thinking skills to question and analyze information, avoiding misinformation and discerning trustworthy sources.
Role of Testimony	Investigates the role of testimony in knowledge acquisition, examining how trust and social relationships influence the acceptance of others' accounts.	Emphasizes the importance of evaluating testimonial evidence, such as expert opinions and eyewitness accounts, to determine their reliability.
	Complementary Insights
Context	Provides insight into the social and cultural contexts that shape information and knowledge production.	Helps individuals understand the context in which information is created and disseminated, improving their ability to interpret and use information effectively.
Ethical Considerations	Explores ethical issues related to knowledge production and dissemination, including epistemic injustice and the fair distribution of epistemic resources.	Includes understanding the ethical use of information, such as respecting intellectual property, avoiding plagiarism, and using information responsibly.
Knowledge Construction	Focuses on how knowledge is constructed collaboratively within communities, emphasizing the role of social interactions and institutional practices.	Encourages collaborative learning and the sharing of information, recognizing that knowledge is often constructed through group efforts.

 

Practical Applications

Some people might consider epistemology as too theoretical and impractical. However, combining social epistemology with information literacy provides insight into three practical applications: (1) education and training, (2) combating misinformation, and (3) enhancing public discourse.

 

		Social Epistemology		Information Literacy
Education and Training	Incorporating social epistemology into information literacy programs can help students and professionals understand the broader social dynamics that influence information and knowledge.		Teaching information literacy with a focus on social epistemology can enhance critical awareness of how social factors impact the reliability and credibility of information.
Combating Misinformation	Social epistemology's insights into the social mechanisms of misinformation can inform strategies for teaching information literacy, helping individuals to recognize and resist false information		Information literacy programs can use concepts from social epistemology to address the social and psychological factors that make individuals susceptible to misinformation.
Enhancing Public Discourse	Understanding the principles of social epistemology can improve public discourse by fostering a more critical and reflective approach to information sharing.		Information literacy initiatives can leverage social epistemology to promote more informed and respectful discussions, particularly in online and media environments.

 

The relationship between social epistemology and information literacy is symbiotic, enriching each field. Social epistemology provides a deeper understanding of the social contexts and dynamics influencing information and knowledge. In contrast, information literacy equips individuals with practical skills to navigate and critically assess the information landscape. Together, they offer a robust framework for developing more informed, critical, and ethical consumers and producers of knowledge.

 

References

Doolittle, P. E., & Hicks, D. (2003). Constructivism as a theoretical foundation for the use of technology in social studies. Theory & Research in Social Education, 31(1), 72–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2003.10473216

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

Nord, Martin I. (2019). Understanding critical information literacy through social epistemology. Canadian Journal of Academic Librarianship, 5, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.33137/cjal-rcbu.v5.28630

 Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2024, March 22). Social epistemology. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology-social/

 

Navigating the Complexities and Dynamics of the Information Ecosystem

 

 

By Lilian H. Hill

 

The information ecosystem refers to the complex network of processes, technologies, individuals, and institutions involved in the creation, distribution, consumption, and regulation of information. It encompasses various elements that interact and influence each other, shaping how information is produced, shared, and used in society. The use of the term ecosystem as a metaphor suggests key properties of environments in which information technology is used. An information ecosystem is a complex system of parts and relationships. It exhibits diversity and experiences continual evolution. Various parts of an ecology coevolve, changing together according to the relationships in the system (Nardi & O’Day, 1999).

 

While the term Information Ecosystem has been in use in academic circles for more than 20 years, it has penetrated today’s media. The dynamic and often unpredictable information ecosystem we inhabit necessitates renewed focus on the fundamental concepts of that ecosystem (Kuehn, 2022). The relationship between information literacy and the information ecosystem is symbiotic and integral. Information literacy refers to the set of skills and knowledge that allows individuals to effectively find, evaluate, use, and communicate information. It encompasses critical thinking and problem-solving abilities in relation to information handling. The term information ecosystem describes the complex environment in which information is produced, distributed, consumed, and preserved. This includes libraries, databases, media, social networks, and other channels and platforms where information flows.

 

Burgeoning and rapidly evolving information technologies influence information production and access. While the emphasis should be on the human activities served by information technologies, the truth is that technology is radically changing ways that information is produced, accessed, understood, and applied.

 

Components of the Information Ecosystem

Multiple constituents work together to produce, distribute, interpret, consume, and regulate information.

 

Information Producers

·      Journalists and Media Organizations: Traditional news outlets, digital news platforms, and independent journalists who gather, verify, and disseminate news.

·      Academic and Research Institutions: Universities, research centers, and scholars who produce scholarly articles, studies, and data.

·      Government Agencies: Institutions that generate reports, statistics, and public records.

·      Businesses and Corporations: Companies that create content for marketing, public relations, and corporate communications.

·      Individuals: Citizens who produce content through blogs, social media, and other personal platforms.

 

Information Distributors

·      Social Media Platforms: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn, and others that facilitate the rapid spread of information.

·      Search Engines: Google, Bing, and others that organize and provide access to information.

·      Traditional Media: Newspapers, television, radio, and magazines distributing news and entertainment content.

·      Online Platforms: Websites, forums, and blogs that host and share various forms of content.

 

Information Consumers

·      General Public: Individuals who consume news, entertainment, educational content, and other forms of information.

·      Professionals: Individuals in specific fields who create and rely on specialized information.

·      Organizations: Businesses, nonprofits, and governmental bodies that use information for decision-making and strategy.

 

Regulatory Bodies

·      Government Regulators: Agencies that enforce laws and regulations related to media, information privacy, and intellectual property.

·      Industry Groups: Organizations that set standards and guidelines for information dissemination and ethical practices.

 

Dynamics of the Information Ecosystem

Engaging within the information ecosystem requires participating in interrelated activities. Information is generated through research, reporting, personal expression, and other methods. Verification processes, such as fact-checking and peer review, are crucial to ensure accuracy and credibility. Information is distributed through various channels, from traditional media to digital platforms. Access to information is influenced by factors such as digital divide, censorship, and platform algorithms. Individuals consume information based on personal preferences, biases, and social influences. Interpretation of information can vary widely, affecting public opinion and behavior. Consumers provide feedback through comments, shares, likes, and other forms of engagement. This interaction can influence future content production and distribution strategies. Finally, regulatory bodies and ethical standards shape the practices of information producers and distributors. Unfortunately, technological innovations occur more rapidly than regulation and ethical standards. Issues such as misinformation, data privacy, and intellectual property rights are key considerations.

 

Challenges in the Information Ecosystem

With technological advances, numerous challenges exist, including the rapid spread of mis-and dis-information, information overload, echo chambers, inequities, and increased privacy concerns. The spread of false or misleading information can have significant societal impacts, from influencing elections to public health crises. The vast amount of information can overwhelm consumers, making it difficult to discern credible sources.  Algorithms and personalized content can create echo chambers where individuals are exposed only to information that reinforces their existing beliefs. Inequities in access to technology and information resources can exacerbate social and economic disparities. The collection and use of personal data by information platforms raises significant privacy issues.

 

Artificial Intelligence and the Information Ecosystem

AI systems are reshaping the information ecosystem. Information systems play a crucial role in everyday life by influencing and reorganizing people’s thoughts, actions, social interactions, and identities. Hirvonen et al. (2023) argued that the “affordances of AI systems integrated into search engines, social media platforms, streaming services, and media generation, shape such practices in ways that may, paradoxically, result both in the increase and reduction of diversity of and access to information” (p. 1).

 

Fleming (2023) indicated that AI tools can create distorted histories and fake profiles, presenting them persuasively as facts. The stakes are escalating daily as rapid advancements in generative AI pose the risk of escalating online hate speech and misinformation to unprecedented levels. These voices are not new, but the global reach of social media allows lies and conspiracy theories to spread instantly worldwide, affecting millions, undermining trust in science, and fostering hatred potent enough to incite violence. Pernice (2019) indicates that the questions of how to (1) effectively safeguard the deliberative process of building political will and (2) preserve the legitimacy of the democratic process against various IT-driven manipulation attempts remains unresolved. 

 

Importance of a Healthy Information Ecosystem

Peterson-Salahuddin (2023) commented that concerns within information ecosystems include (1) ways information production, particularly in mainstream journalism, can lead to information inequity in its representations and (2) the dissemination and retrieval of this journalistic information via algorithmically mediated online systems, such as social media and search platforms, can replicate and reinforce information inequity within the broader information ecosystem. A healthy information ecosystem is essential for informed citizenship, effective governance, and social cohesion. It promotes:

 

1.    Informed Decision-Making: Accurate and reliable information enables individuals and organizations to make informed decisions.

 

2.    Democratic Participation: Access to diverse and credible information supports democratic processes and civic engagement.

 

3.    Social Trust: A trustworthy information ecosystem fosters social trust and cooperation.

 

4.    Innovation and Progress: Access to knowledge and information drives innovation, education, and cultural development.

 

In a prophetic comment, Nardi and O’Day (1999) indicated that the ecological metaphor conveys a “sense of urgency about the need to take control of our information ecologies, to inject our own values and needs into them so that we are not overwhelmed by some of our technological tools” (p. 49). Maintaining a healthy information ecosystem requires efforts from all stakeholders, including information producers, distributors, consumers, and regulators, to uphold standards of accuracy, fairness, and transparency.

 

References

Fleming, M. (2023, June 13). Healing Our Troubled Information Ecosystem. Medium. https://melissa-fleming.medium.com/healing-our-troubled-information-ecosystem-cf2e9e8a4bed

Hirvonen, N., Jylhä, V., Lao, Y., & Larsson, S. (2023). Artificial intelligence in the information ecosystem: Affordances for everyday information seeking. Journal of the Association of Information Science Technology, 74(12), 1–14.

Kuehn, E. F. (2022). The information ecosystem concept in information literacy: A theoretical approach and definition. Journal of the Association of Information Science Technology, 74(4), 434-443. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24733

Nardi, B. A., & O’Day, V. L. (1999). Information ecologies: Using technology with heart. MIT Press.

Pernice, I. (2019, March 5). Protecting the global digital information ecosystem:  A practical initiative. Internet Policy Review. https://policyreview.info/articles/news/protecting-global-digital-information-ecosystem-practical-initiative/1386

Peterson-Salahuddin, C. (2024). From information access to production: New perspectives on addressing information inequity in our digital information ecosystem. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 1. https://doi-org /10.1002/asi.24879