關於 thereby詞性 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

淺談「假新聞」

最近上課時學到一個新單字「positionality」，讓我想到當前社群媒體上，不停看到的「fake news」——假新聞。

簡言之，「positionality」(位置性) 被定義為於種族、階級、性別、性取向以及能力等狀態中，創造你身分的社會與政治背景。位置性還描述了你的身分如何影響你對世界的理解與看法，以及潛在的偏見。

positionality 位置性；定位
https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/3390885/
https://www.lexico.com/definition/positionality

以下是我對「positionality」與 「fake news」的些許觀點：

“Fake news” has permeated all facets of life, ranging from social media interaction to presidential elections. Fake news can be defined as “fabricated information that mimics news media content in form but not in organizational process or intent” (Lazer et al., 2018, p. 1094). The creators and outlets of fake news do not ensure the accuracy and credibility of information, but rather disseminate misinformation or disinformation for purposes ranging from personal amusement to creating deceptions to achieve political aims. At times, fake news is created and disseminated by state or non-state actors using social media accounts and networks of bots designed to hijack feed algorithms of platforms such as Twitter or Facebook (Prier, 2017, p. 54). In the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, Facebook estimated that up to 60 million bots were used to post political content. Some of the same bots were then used in an attempt to influence the 2017 French election (Lazer et al., 2018, p. 1095). Such campaigns can be understood as a form of information warfare, a comprehensive attempt to control and influence every facet of the information supply chain, thereby influencing public opinion and behaviors. (Prier, 2017, p. 54). Often, fake news is not directly created by actors that seek to manipulate but by journalists or content creators whose content favors or aligns with the narratives of these actors (Doshi, 2020).

從社群媒體的互動到總統選舉，「假新聞」（fake news）已滲透至生活的各個層面。假新聞可被定義為「在形式上而非組織過程或意圖上，模仿新聞媒體內容所捏造的資訊」（Lazer et al., 2018, p. 1094）。無論是出於個人愛好或為達政治目的而有所欺瞞，假新聞的製造者與傳播管道並不保證資訊的準確性與可信度，反而是為了散播錯誤訊息（misinformation）或扭曲訊息（disinformation）。有時，假新聞是由國家或非國家行為者（state or non-state actors）所製造與傳播，藉由社群媒體帳號及網絡機器人來劫持諸如臉書與推特等平臺的推送演算法（Prier, 2017, p. 54）。在2016年的美國總統大選中，臉書估計有多達６千萬個機器人被用來發布政治貼文。其中，有部分機器人被用於影響隔年的法國大選（Lazer et al., 2018, p. 1095）。此類行動可視為資訊戰（information warfare）的一種形式，一種對控制與影響資訊供應鏈各環節的全面嘗試，從而影響公眾輿論與行為（Prier, 2017, p. 54）。假新聞通常是由記者或內容創造者（content creators）所創造，而非試圖操弄的行為者，前者的內容偏好符合後者的敘事（Doshi, 2020）。

Nevertheless, while the term “fake news” is commonplace, there is no universal, measurable way to quantify the fakeness or truthfulness of news. There are many fact-checking and media-bias detection tools, but they cannot objectively detect and clarify the more subtle and nuanced aims of manipulative actors that play a crucial role in news production. It can also be argued that the veracity of news depends not only on the actors that seek to manipulate it, but also on the positionality of its consumers. Therefore, one’s initial line of defense against misleading news lies not in the plethora of fact-checking devices but more in one’s pre-existing dispositions and skills to think and act in response to misleading information. This ability can be referred to as critical thinking, which can be more concretely expounded as “reasonable and reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do” (Ennis, 2011, p. 15).

然而，即便「假新聞」一詞隨處可見，卻沒有統一、可衡量的方式來量化新聞的虛假性或真實性。目前有許多事實查核與媒體偏見檢測工具，但它們無法客觀地檢測與說明行為操弄者更狡猾、更細緻的目標，而這些操弄者往往在新聞的生產中發揮著重要作用。我們也可以說，新聞的真實性不僅取決於試圖操弄它的行為者，同時還取決於新聞受眾的位置性。因此，一個人對抗誤導性新聞的第一道防線，不在於這些五花八門的事實查核方式，反而在於個人所固有的性格，以及針對誤導性資訊的思考與行動等相關技能。這種能力可稱為批判性思考（critical thinking），意即「專注於決定相信什麼或做什麼的理性思考與反思性思考」（Ennis, 2011, p. 15）。

Taiwan, also known as the Republic of China (ROC), is at the forefront of information warfare. It is wedged between the geopolitical struggles of global and regional hegemonies such as the United States and China, the People's Republic of China (PRC). Compounding the matter are the Taiwan’s own political actors vying for influence and power. This struggle seeps into all aspects of life and practice, mainly manifesting itself on social media, a battleground of information warfare. The Ministry of Education of Taiwan is cognizant of these information campaigns, and efforts have been made to introduce media literacy into all parts of its education system. According to the ministry, the government has tried to promote media literacy education since 2000 (MOE, 2002, p. 1), with one of its primary goals to cultivate its “citizens” abilities for independent learning, critical thinking, and problem solving” (MOE, 2002, p. 2).

臺灣，也被稱為中華民國，正處於資訊戰的最前線。這是全球霸權與地區霸權之間——如美國與中國（中華人民共和國）——的地緣政治對抗。使問題惡化的是臺灣自身的政治行動者對影響力與權力的奪取。這場對抗遍布於現實生活的各個面向，主要於社群媒體中——資訊戰的戰場——展露無遺。臺灣的教育部注意到了這些資訊的煙硝，並已努力將媒體素養引入其教育體系。據該部稱，自2000年以來，政府一直試圖推展媒體素養教育（MOE, 2002, p. 1），其主要目標之一是培養「公民獨立學習、批判性思考以及解決問題的能力。」（MOE, 2002, p. 2）。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

上述段落認為，由於個人的位置性(positionality)，「假新聞」極難定義。此外，有許多人把不符合自身成見與偏好的新聞逕斥為假新聞。這其實相當危險，因為個人觀點將會變得愈發孤立與激進。

閱聽人應意識到，他們在網路上看到的每個資訊都有特定立場。是否真有毫無立場的新聞文章？為了對抗操弄性或強制性資訊（coercive information），我們必須意識到權力於個中的作用，以及我們自身的位置性如何形塑我們的詮釋。這是我們的第一道防線。

★★★★★★★★★★★★

參考文獻

Doshi, R. (2020, January). China steps up its information war in Taiwan. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved March, 21, 2021, from https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-01-09/china-steps-its-information-war-taiwan

Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational leadership, 43(2), 44-48.

Lazer, D. M., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., ... & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094-1096.

MOE (Ministry of Education), Taiwan. (2002). White paper on media literacy educational policy. Retrieved March, 21, 2021, from http://english.moe.gov.tw/public/Attachment/ 2122416591771.pdf

Prier, J. (2017). Commanding the trend: Social media as information warfare. Strategic Studies Quarterly: SSQ, 11(4), 50-85.

★★★★★★★★★★★★

教育時評: http://bit.ly/39ABON9

相關詞彙: https://bit.ly/2UncrfI

TED相關影片: https://bit.ly/3BDsDKl

（支聯會2020年8月19日聲明 Statement by Hong Kong Alliance, 19 August 2020 ）

強烈譴責教育局篡改歷史
抹掉軍隊「六四」屠殺真相

報載有關通識科教科書經「自願送審計劃」送交教育局審查後，出版商涉嫌配合當局的所謂「優化意見」政策，刻意「河蟹」起來，淡化、粉飾、扭曲，以至刪去「現代中國」單元中多個被視為敏感議題的教學資料，其中涉及「維權運動」和「六四事件」。

以齡記出版的《高中新世紀通識：現代中國》為例，原版列出「維權運動」的原因時，提及當局「認為維權運動造成社會動盪，因此我們大多以打壓的方式處理，例如拘禁維權人士、封鎖網上相關言論等…」，修訂後改為「維權運動可能造成社會動盪，民眾應以理性的方式和我們反映問題及表達不滿，例如通過國家信訪局網站作出申訴…」。 可是事實上，上訪者多遭遇截訪、關押甚至酷刑，受屈者即使循司法程序尋求公義，亦經常遭到有關當局的滋擾和逼迫，造成更大和更多的冤案，如此的修訂資料無疑是文過飾非，為當局的惡行塗脂抹粉。

該書在修訂「六四事件」資料時的手法同樣拙劣不堪。 原版提及觸發事件的「貪污問題」和「官倒現象」等起因，以及過程中的「軍隊清場」和「武力鎮壓」等解說如今完全被刪除，甚至「六四事件」字眼也被抹掉，修改為「造成民眾普遍不滿，更削弱政府管治效能，威脅中國社會穩定」云云，閃爍其詞，簡直完全抹煞事件始末的客觀和準確陳述。這樣的修訂手法不僅是偏向性混淆事實，更有意掩飾，不惜篡改真相，將血跡斑斑的「六四」屠殺慘劇，避重就輕的寫成維穩篇章，其政治意圖昭然若揭，卻是有違教育專業原則。

須知歷史教學是認識和探究的學習過程，有關教學材料的整理、編製和鋪陳須持平公正，盡量展示和引述正反兩方面資料，從而引導學生以多角度討論、思考和判斷。 歷史教學並不是政治宣傳，而歷史教材因此絕對不是以「政治正確」掛帥，經修改以凸顯黨國政策和正面形象。 極權國家慣常以操控的教育手段「修改」歷史，從而「捏塑」人民的歷史記憶，「箝制」人民的思想，以配合其管治策略。 香港人，特別是香港教育界，必須有所警覺。

為此，支聯會抗議教育局的審核教科書機制淪為政治審查工具，並強烈譴責掩飾真相的歷史教材修訂。 歷史絕對不容當權者肆意抹煞，支聯會當前運作的「六四紀念館」，以及籌建中的網上「六四記憶。人權博物館」，正是要好好保存有關的寶貴和真確歷史資料，讓史實和記憶傳承下去。

(Statement by Hong Kong Alliance, 19 August 2020)

Hong Kong Alliance strongly condemns the Education Bureau for distorting history

Stop erasing the truth of the Tiananmen Massacre

Media have reported that after Liberal Studies textbooks were sent to the Education Bureau for review through a ‘voluntary submission scheme’, publishers have cooperated with the so-called ‘optimization comments’ policy, downplaying, whitewashing, distorting, and even deleting many teaching materials deemed ‘sensitive’ in the Modern China unit, including the ‘human rights movement’ and ‘June 4 incident’.

For example, take ‘High School New Century Liberal Studies: Modern China’ published by Ling Kee. The original version says the authorities ‘believe the human rights movement has caused social unrest, so they mostly deal with it in repressive ways such as detaining human rights defenders, blocking relevant online comments, etc’. This was revised to ‘[the] human rights movement might cause social unrest. [The] public should report problems and express dissatisfaction with [the authorities] in a rational manner, for example, by making a complaint through the website of the National Public Complaints and Proposals Administration…’ However in reality, petitioners are often intercepted, imprisoned and even tortured. Even if the aggrieved seek justice through judicial procedures, they are often harassed and persecuted by the relevant authorities, resulting in more injustice. Such revised information is undoubtedly a whitewash to cover up the authorities' evil deeds.

Revisions of information pertaining to the ‘June 4th incident’ in the book are also problematic. While the original version gave ‘corruption’ and ‘official profiteering’ as triggers of mass protests in 1989 and made reference to ‘clearance by the army’ and ‘suppression by force’, this has all been deleted in the revision. Even the words ‘June 4th incident’ have been erased. Instead, the proests are described as having ‘caused public dissatisfaction, weakened governance effectiveness, and threatened the stability of Chinese society’, which is evasive and completely obliterates the objective and accurate account of the incident. Such revisions are not only biased, obscuring the facts, but they even try to conceal and distort the truth. The blood-stained tragedy of Tiananmen Massacre becomes a chapter on stability maintenance. The political intentions are obvious. They violate the principles of education.

It is important to note that history teaching is a learning process of recognition and inquiry. The collation, compilation and presentation of teaching materials should be balanced and fair, presenting and citing both pros and cons, so as to guide students to discuss, think and judge for themselves from multiple perspectives. History teaching is not political propaganda. History textbooks should therefore definitely not be modified to highlight party-state policy and improve its image. Totalitarian countries often use control over education as a means to ‘modify’ history, thereby molding people's historical memory and suppressing people's thinking in conformity with their governance strategy. Hong Kong people, especially the Hong Kong education sector, must be vigilant.

Therefore, Hong Kong Alliance protests that the Education Bureau’s textbook review mechanism has become a tool for political vetting, and strongly condemns revisions of history textbooks that conceal the truth. History must not be arbitrarily erased by those in power. The goals of the currently operating June 4 Museum and Online Tiananmen Massacre Memorial Museum under development by Hong Kong Alliance are precisely to preserve the relevant precious and true historical materials so that historical facts and memories can be preserved and passed on.

#教育局 #政治審查 #歷史 #六四真相 #六四屠殺 #通識科 #篡改歷史 #六四紀念館 #六四記憶人權博物館