In this lecture, I introduce several common cognitive biases and logical fallacies, explain how to identify fake news, and suggest steps that can be taken to enhance one's ability to be a smart consumer of news.

1. How to be a Smart Consumer of News:
Identifying cognitive biases,
logical fallacies, and fake news
Prof. Josh Gellers
University of North Florida

2. Criticism v. Critical Thinking
Criticism:
• Finding fault in
something
• Often directed at
someone
• Sometimes driven by
emotion
Critical Thinking:
• Making a judgment
based on questioning
and analysis
• Identifies underlying
assumptions and
biases
• You present reasoning
and evidence
2

3. Cognitive Biases
• Confirmation Bias:
– Tendency to seek out
information that agrees
with our existing beliefs
• Out-group Homogeneity
Effect:
– Tendency to view others
as more similar to each
other than members of
one’s own group
• Blind-spot Bias:
– Tendency to see biases in
others but not yourself
Example: “I only watch
CNN/Fox News because that’s
the only news source that
presents the truth.”
Example: “All
liberals/conservatives are the
same, but my group is diverse.”
Example: “Everyone is biased
except me. I am capable of
being completely objective.”
3

4. Logical Fallacies
• Strawman:
– Misrepresenting someone’s
argument to make it easier
to attack.
• Red Herring:
– Something that misleads or
distracts from a relevant or
important issue.
• Ad Hominem:
– Attacking a person’s
character or personal traits
in an attempt to undermine
their argument.
Example: “You think we should
raise taxes until every
American is homeless.”
Example: “How can you support
putting troops into Syria when our
cities need better schools?”
Example: “You’re just an
egghead professor so I can’t
believe anything you say.”
Example: Democratic Primary Debate
Example: Republican Primary Debate 4

5. Fake News
• Information posing as news that is fabricated
and/or exaggerated
5
NOT A REAL
NEWSPAPER!

6. Fake News During the Election
6
Source: BuzzFeed News

7. How to Spot Fake Newz
• 1) Read the URL:
– Note the unusual endings, which can include —
but are not limited to — .co, .info, .net, etc.
• 2) Go beyond the headline:
– Look up authors’ names to verify whether they
really are who they say they are and look at who is
quoted, cited or mentioned in the story.
• 3) Check the sources:
– Search for the data referred to in the article, and
assess whether it was interpreted fairly. (Snopes)
7

8. Clickbait
• Content, especially that of a sensational or
provocative nature, whose main purpose is to
attract attention and draw visitors to a
particular web page.
Addictinginfo.org
(very left)
8

9. Consider the Original Source
EPA Report (2016, p. 2): “The available data and information allowed us
to qualitatively describe factors that affect the frequency or severity of
impacts at the local level. However, significant data gaps and uncertainties
in the available data prevented us from calculating or estimating the
national frequency of impacts on drinking water resources from activities
in the hydraulic fracturing water cycle.”
Pacific
Standard
Magazine
(leans left)
The
National
Interest
(leans right)
9

10. Ideological Spectrum of News
10
Source: Vanessa Otero

11. Questioning Convention
• Case Study: The Story of 98.6⁰F
(Freakonomics Podcast)
• Should you challenge existing
convention? YES
• Bad Motivation: All doctors are
biased! It’s a Big Pharma
conspiracy! End of discussion!
• Good Motivation: Is this
number correct? How did
doctors identify it? Let’s do
research!
• What you should do: Question,
replicate, experiment, seek
valid evidence
11
Call bias on all the things!

12. What can you do?
• 1) Follow legitimate news sources staffed with
professional journalists.
• 2) When you read an article, try to find the same story
in another news outlet you don’t normally read.
• 3) Don’t share something you haven’t read and vetted
yourself.
• 4) Question everything, from news articles to
professors, doctors, lawyers, scientists, politicians, and
journalists!
• 5) Be prepared to critically assess claims and evaluate
evidence.
12