In an onslaught of information packaged in loaded language, bias, propaganda and polarization, we’re called to deeply examine how language’s strategic manipulations attempt to illustrate reality.

Even here, the words I’ve chosen — onslaught, polarization, manipulation — intend to bring a sense of urgency, even a fear of threat, to the tone of this column. My call to action isn’t as sexy as whistling and filming Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in the streets, but to habituate yourself to media literacy for the sake of American integrity.  

Emily Vraga, a professor in the Hubbard School of Journalism and Mass Communication, specializes in how people respond to news. Her research revolves around media literacy, which she defines as the ability to critically evaluate messages for meaning and information processes — a crucial skill in these trying times.

“At a time of very intense partisan polarization in the U.S., what we see and what we should expect to see is a lot of people interpreting the exact same situation very differently,” Vraga said. 

We’ve seen interpretations skewed in headlines and press conferences. 

People who live in the U.S. but are not citizens are referred to as vulnerable neighbors, undocumented noncitizens, illegal immigrants, illegal aliens and illegal criminal aliens. 

Alex Pretti and Renee Good, after being shot and killed by federal agents last month, have had a panoply of labels attached to their actions and deaths: constitutional observers, ICE-watchers, advocates, activists, agitators, insurrectionists and domestic terrorists, just to name a few. 

Minneapolis itself has been sensationalized as “fighting for the soul of the country,” as The Guardian put it, or “ground zero for stealing taxpayer dollars,” as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said on Fox News.  

The multitude of labels — though perhaps inciting — are not surprising and sometimes even strategic. 

“So part of that is going to be people trying to represent things that they think will benefit them,” Vraga said. “Some part of it’s just the way humans engage with the world is always through their own perceptual lens.”

Notice here, even as you’re reading the terms above, which ones feel true and which ones do you blatantly disagree with? Imagine: Someone out there vehemently opposes your alignment. So, how do we get our own bias out of the way to simply do better? 

Hubbard associate professor Susan LoRusso said this responsibility falls on us as individuals.

“We live in such a messy information and media environment,” LoRusso said. “There’s so much bad information out there.” 

Acknowledging that while this does mean more work for the already-busy,  information-overwhelmed individual, LoRusso suggested asking these questions when evaluating potentially biased or untrue language and information: 

• Is there loaded language? 
• Who is responsible for this content? 
• Who is the publisher/author? 
• What are other sources of information saying?
• Who else is talking about this? 
• Is the information current? 
• Are the images relevant and authentic? 

“Bias exists everywhere,” LoRusso said. “Media isn’t really any different.” 

However, LoRusso said not to discount news that is biased or targeted to a specific audience. Some outlets that challenge your viewpoint, no matter how mind-boggling that perspective, can keep you informed and aware, therefore beefing up your media literacy muscle. 

We’re all susceptible to the power language has over our emotions. But those who can engage critically with that language, to be simultaneously skeptical and open-minded, can engage with the entire political spectrum. 

College field representative for Turning Point USA, Dalton Nelson, who was tabling in Coffman Union the same day as the Students for a Democratic Society walkout, said he loves debate and conversation but does not get upset over particular phrases.

“I don’t really get triggered over words, ‘cause they’re just words,” Nelson said.

Nevermind what side of the aisle someone is on, Nelson said he is willing to engage with them to discuss America. 

“In the overall goal, we both want America to be the best place on Earth,” Nelson said. “It’s just the liberal viewpoint of it, and my viewpoint of how we get there is extremely different.” 

Communication studies professor Mary Vavrus said some words currently and historically employed have a reflexive impact on listeners, especially Americans. Domestic terrorist is one of those triggering terms.

“What I’m seeing and hearing is just a textbook case of a campaign to dehumanize people, whether they’re migrants, whether they’re ICE observers, whether they’re protesters,” Vavrus said. 

Vavrus added that dehumanization justifies violent action as something that is deserved. 

This framing of “deserving” is something Nelson noticed as well, particularly in the older generation of conservatives’ responses to the killings of Pretti and Good.

“No one deserves to die,” Nelson said. “If we start thinking they deserve it, we’re no better than the people who cheered when Charlie [Kirk] was shot.”

Vigilance in identifying the narratives that are emotionally gravitating is how we navigate where our own biases come from and how we’re being shaped by new information. No news story, social media post or press conference with public officials is going to endow reality to the entire situation. 

As Vraga pointed out, people will use language and share information that benefits themselves. But what happens when information is false? 

“Where we have to be really careful is where misinformation becomes essential to the fabric of the narrative,” Vraga said.

Then who do we trust for reality? The answer: ourselves. 

Vraga added that building infrastructures around media literacy is imperative. One example is to take notes from our European neighbors and bake media literacy into education. This, Vraga said, creates societies that are much more resilient to misinformation and bias and trusting of their journalistic institutions. 

“To reward information that does its best to maintain the highest standards of veracity,” Vraga said. “That, as a society, we value accuracy.”

At the very least, we should be a society that values reality. Unfortunately, there is comfort and complacency in confirmation bias. But do us all a favor and get media literate.