On 18th March 2025, IAME had the pleasure to welcome Jutta Haider and Olof Sundin, authors of the book “The Paradoxes of Media and Information Literacy” to debate about the role of media education in our decade and current information environment.
This webinar was moderated by Prof. David Buckingham and Maria Leonida. 65 participants joined the online meeting.
The book is available in open access here: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/oa-mono/10.4324/9781003163237/paradoxes-media-information-literacy-jutta-haider-olof-sundin
Did you missed the webinar? Relive it in video:
The webinar focused on media and information literacy (MIL) and its role in addressing misinformation, fake news, and post-truth politics. The discussion revolved around the book The Paradoxes of Media and Information Literacy by Jutta Haider and Olof Sundin, which explores the contradictions within MIL and its effectiveness in the current media landscape.
Over the past decade, the debate on misinformation has evolved significantly. Initially triggered by events such as Donald Trump’s election and Brexit, the focus was on individual instances of fake news. However, the discussion has now shifted towards understanding the broader systems and strategies that drive misinformation. One of the key realizations is that misinformation is not a temporary crisis but a persistent feature of the information ecosystem. Additionally, concerns have grown over the unequal distribution of power in controlling digital platforms, which play a crucial role in shaping public discourse.
A major paradox discussed in the webinar is the role of critical thinking. While MIL aims to cultivate critical thinking skills, excessive skepticism can lead to cynicism and a complete mistrust of all information. This phenomenon has been exploited by conspiracy groups and the far right, who use critical thinking techniques to challenge mainstream media and academic institutions. Rather than fostering a more informed public, this can create an environment where all sources are questioned, making it difficult to distinguish between reliable and unreliable information.
The issue of trust emerged as another central theme. Trust in institutions, media, and experts has become fragile, particularly in societies experiencing political and social crises. However, trust is not universal—it depends on historical and political contexts. While high-trust societies function smoothly, they may also be more vulnerable to authoritarian shifts if trust is misused. Conversely, in countries with histories of dictatorship or corruption, skepticism toward institutions can be a survival mechanism rather than a flaw.
The discussion also addressed the challenges of integrating MIL into education. There is an ongoing tension between teaching students to analyze information critically and providing them with factual knowledge. Some political movements advocate for a return to fact-based curricula, sidelining analytical skills that help students understand how information is produced and manipulated. Moreover, the increasing dominance of digital platforms in education raises concerns, as these platforms are primarily profit-driven and often lack transparency, making it harder to teach students about their influence on information flows.
One particularly striking point was how far-right movements have co-opted MIL concepts such as source criticism. Traditionally, source criticism encourages individuals to verify information and assess credibility. However, some groups have weaponized this approach, encouraging people to “do their own research” in ways that challenge established institutions and promote alternative, often misleading, narratives. This tactic undermines trust in traditional sources while giving credibility to misinformation.
Ultimately, the discussion emphasized that MIL alone cannot solve the misinformation crisis. While it is a valuable tool, it remains an individual solution to a systemic problem. Addressing misinformation effectively requires a broader political and infrastructural approach, including greater transparency from digital platforms, stronger media regulations, and a renewed focus on information integrity rather than just combating fake news.