Documentaries are valuable modes for exploring, explaining and combating disinformation by means of presenting factual information in an easily consumable format. The documentary format directly relates to the films made in this course in that the necessity for truth, and exposing the truth, is central to their content, and similarly to the existence of documentaries.
In the first reading for this course, Lee McIntyre (2018) outlined the importance of viewers’ interrogation of the information they consume, and to look at facts shared from within their context, not as they are presented to you. Through this piece, McIntyre (2018) deduced that the root of the problem was that facts are hard to distinguish in the modern, globalised world. His writing sought to bring attention to the necessity of truth and the ways in which truth can be contorted. Our interview with Dr. Meg Elkins turned out to be a direct response to this observation. Without knowing it, McIntyre’s writing had pathed the way for our documentary to take place.
We wanted our documentary to be an exploration on the effects of disinformation on the psyche, and through this initial prompt our documentary dove into how disinformation confirms biases. Dr. Elkins defined the origins of disinformation and sought to explain the ways in which we, as consumers of information, are susceptible to it. Through this exploration and explanation, Dr. Elkins humanised a problem that feels so distant and scary to many. She removed the barrier of the screen through explaining social contexts that influence the ways in which we respond to information, cementing McIntyre’s (2018) point that facts are more emotional than we imagine. I think the use of a professor discussing a topic that is foreign, through clear use of research and relation to human experiences, achieves the goal of explaining disinformation and goes further to make the content less confronting. This last point is important because a lack of information relates to the fear surrounding disinformation, and directly relates to the dissemination of disinformation. As Dr. Elkins remarked “Anger and fear are much bigger motivators to make us click, share, read, [and] like” (personal communication, May 8 2024) .
She goes on to say that “asking ‘why’, and going deeply into the ‘why’” is how people can distinguish truth from lies (Elkins, personal communication, May 8 2024). These assertions of advice are helpful for the viewer; through posing direct questions she is placing the onus on the individual watching the documentary to assess their own circumstances. In such a digital world, I think everyone would benefit from watching our film, but maybe more specifically younger people who are chronically online and susceptible to disinformation.
Through education we are taught to assess our sources and question the information we consume, but not everyone is afforded the privilege of education or have not yet gone through said education. That is to say that anyone online, who consumes information, or anyone who is marginalised from/inexperienced with technology, would benefit from understanding the causes and effects of disinformation. Additionally, students and educators within the Communications realm can benefit from this film by learning to analyse the content they publish for misinformation, disinformation and bias. As up and coming content creators and educators, we have to be aware of the current problems within our sphere and learn ways to negate perpetuating harm.
Sources
McIntyre L (2018) Post-Truth, MIT Press, Cambridge.