With Zuckerberg stepping back from moderation, Facebook has been left to the mob.
Some argue this is a win for free speech; others fear the chaos of unchecked information.
But in truth, whether moderated or not, no social media platform will help us find the truth.
For us here on DisruptEd, the real question isn’t whether we should jump ship to the next platform. It’s more about the ripple effects of these decisions on our tamariki. How do we ensure they’re set up to deal with the fall out of this decision in their digital realm?—not just on Facebook (which they already see as a relic for “old people”) but across all Meta platforms and beyond?
Misinformation
As Yuval Noah Harari highlights in his book 21 Lessons for the 21st Century, humans are not naturally predisposed to distinguish truth in a world inundated with data.
We evolved in small, tight-knit groups where trust was built on face-to-face interactions, not on algorithms and distant online networks. This biological reality clashes with our digital age, where misinformation spreads faster than fact.
Harari warned that without robust mechanisms to filter information, humanity risks descending into a state where narratives, not evidence, drive decision-making. We all know that social media platforms, designed to maximise engagement rather than truth, exacerbate this problem. We all know that algorithms amplify sensational content over balanced reporting, creating echo chambers that reinforce biases and divisions.
In Aotearoa, we’ve already seen how this plays out.
The recent protests in Wellington demonstrated the dual-edged nature of social media. On the one hand, platforms brought people together, amplifying voices that might otherwise go unheard. But on the other hand, social media has since been used to divide people and spread bias and misinformation about those very protests.
Take, for example, the way the protests were reported. While many attended to support Māori, the turnout was downplayed in the media, leading to widespread frustration. Fact-checking, which is often held up as a solution to misinformation, was notably absent when it came to accurately reporting the numbers or motivations behind the protests. This omission further fuels distrust and divides public opinion.
As educators, this is a stark reminder that while social media can unite, its algorithms are ultimately designed for engagement—whatever the cost. This should push us to question not only the narratives we see but also most importantly how we prepare our children to critically engage with their digital world.
Again, we all know that our tamariki live in a connected environment where misinformation, cyberbullying, and social pressures travel faster than we can always react. For some of them that world can be more real than reality itself.
These challenges are compounded by the global dominance of platforms like Instagram, WhatsApp, and TikTok, which shape how our young people communicate, share, and even form their sense of identity.
Meta’s move away from moderation raises pressing questions about how these spaces will evolve. If even a platform like Facebook, once a pioneer in online communities and once committed to bringing humans together, devolves into unchecked chaos, what does this mean for our rangatahi? How do we protect them from harmful content, echo chambers, and algorithmic manipulation?
Critical Literacy Over Platform Loyalty
Rather than worrying about which platform comes next, we must ask how well-prepared our young people are to engage critically with whatever platforms they use. Critical literacy is no longer just an “English class skill”; it’s a survival skill.
We need to empower our learners to ask questions like:
Who created this content, and why?
What perspective or bias might it reflect?
How do I verify the accuracy of this information?
What’s the potential impact of sharing this with others?
This aligns with the original values outlined in Te Mātaiaho, which emphasise teaching students to contribute responsibly to their world.
We know that social media can amplify inequities, misrepresent identities, and reinforce harmful stereotypes.
As Meta redefines its role, we must redefine ours.
How do we adapt our teaching to ensure rangatahi are prepared for this evolving reality?
How do we protect them from the fallout of unchecked platforms while empowering them to challenge and reshape the narratives they encounter?
We need to take this conversation beyond our classrooms and into staff meetings, PLD sessions, and forums. Critical literacy needs to be embedded across every subject and year level, from the youngest learners to those about to graduate. It’s not just about recognising fake news—it’s about building a generation of thoughtful citizens who can distinguish truth from noise, and stand firm in their values.
Let’s focus less on where we are online and more on who we are online.
What are your thoughts on these changes? How do you see them impacting your students? Share your ideas and strategies—we need this kōrero now more than ever as we begin 2025.
Commenti