I liked this game because I could see where they were going with it. Though when playing, I felt like my moral obligations weren't going to hold up well in a game like this. So I had to "play the game" in order to win over audience members who weren't going to fact check me. It all kind of just felt like surface level loyalty. But I can see why! Social media is for the quick comments and triggers and if you "play the game" correctly, you can strategically win lots of followers. #so315

While I appreciate this guide to being more media literate, are people actually going to invest in this four step plan? They mentioned people tend to post and consume content without fact checking. Because it's easy and fast, I feel like nobody gives a second thought to random content they consume. Media is a fast way to be "in the know," which is why people like it. I doubt many would actually devote much more time to deep diving into facts unless they were going down a rabbit hole. #so315

If you have a job that requires you to show up high, have trauma bond sex in stairwells, think 9/11 wasn't a terrorist attack, and you constantly seek out the company therapist... you should be finding another job. We have been taught to not spend too much time in front of a screen or else our brain will be mush, and this is their whole career. Except they have to endure content nobody should be recording in the first place. These are inhumane conditions that are insane to ask of anyone. #so315

The whole fact-checking moderators has me in a spiral. In the "Content Moderation" article make me propose important questions like: Who gets to decide what gets flagged, the app or the people? Who gets to decide what is appropriate content, people of authority or the public? Is content moderation the responsibility of the public or the employees of the app? How much strain can we put onto those who have to view the content before it is deemed safe or not? #so315

I found one term in particular really intriguing from the beginning and it stuck with me throughout the documentary. They mentioned that we are living in a "weaponized information environment." To me, they meant that now people are using intel and stories that aren't public knowledge yet and are crafting them into things to promote their side. Which is just so crazy to me to think society can be so vulnerable and naive to anything said by authority figures. #so315

In class we talked about how journalists try to stay objective in their work but may come across as biased due to what their sources provide. There sources determine how the story may get relayed. Jensen offers an additional peace that, "Official sources dominate the mainstream news." This plays on the theory that the ruling class ideology becomes the norm. If authoritative sources and people are seen as trust worthy, the the story will too. A cycle of ease and trust is formed. #so315

The article made me think of the repetitive cycle in media. We don't consume enough media with an open mind in order to form a well rounded opinion. Rather we just like to argue that journalist are biased because they don't share the same views as us or may cover a side of the story that conflicts with our beliefs. That leads journalists to fear covering certain parts of the story because they may get criticized for bias. Then people are again not fully educated and the cycle continues. #so315