The Palgrave Handbook Of Media Misinformation

Karen Fowlerwatt download

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-media-
misinformation-karen-fowlerwatt-48612758

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

The Palgrave Handbook Of Media And Communication Research In Africa

Bruce Mutsvairo

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-media-and-
communication-research-in-africa-bruce-mutsvairo-7047024

The Palgrave Handbook Of European Media Policy Karen Donders

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-european-media-
policy-karen-donders-5334584

The Palgrave Handbook Of Methods For Media Policy Research Hilde Van
Den Bulck

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-methods-for-
media-policy-research-hilde-van-den-bulck-10541138

The Palgrave Handbook Of Violence In Film And Media Steve Choe

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-violence-in-
film-and-media-steve-choe-47216174
The Palgrave Handbook Of Audiovisual Translation And Media
Accessibility 1st Ed Ukasz Bogucki

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-audiovisual-
translation-and-media-accessibility-1st-ed-ukasz-bogucki-22425454

The Palgrave Handbook Of Sound Design And Music In Screen Media

Integrated Soundtracks 1st Edition Liz Greene

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-sound-design-
and-music-in-screen-media-integrated-soundtracks-1st-edition-liz-
greene-5697202

The Palgrave Handbook Of Gender Media And Communication In The Middle

East And North Africa Loubna H Skalli

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-gender-media-
and-communication-in-the-middle-east-and-north-africa-loubna-h-
skalli-49814064

The Palgrave Handbook Of The History Of Human Sciences 1st Edition

David Mccallum

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-the-history-of-
human-sciences-1st-edition-david-mccallum-44988306

The Palgrave Handbook Of Criminology And The Global South 1st Edition
Kerry Carrington Editor

https://ebookbell.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-criminology-
and-the-global-south-1st-edition-kerry-carrington-editor-45446548
The Palgrave Handbook of
Media Misinformation
Edited by
Karen Fowler-Watt · Julian McDougall
The Palgrave Handbook of Media Misinformation
Karen Fowler-Watt • Julian McDougall
Editors

The Palgrave
Handbook of Media
Misinformation
Editors
Karen Fowler-Watt Julian McDougall
Centre for Excellence in Media Practice Centre for Excellence in Media Practice
Bournemouth University Bournemouth University
Poole, Dorset, UK Poole, Dorset, UK

ISBN 978-3-031-11975-0    ISBN 978-3-031-11976-7 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11976-7
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature
Switzerland AG 2023
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher,
whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation,
­reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any
other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation,
computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt
from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in
this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor
the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material
­contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains
neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover Image Credit: SEAN GLADWELL

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 Acknowledgements

Karen and Julian have enjoyed collaborating on this edited volume and wish to
thank all the chapter authors who responded so brilliantly to this challenging
invitation. They would also like to thank Jon Sopel and the team at Penguin
Random House for granting permission to republish from his book
UnPresidented (2021).

v
 Contents

Part I Democracy, Disruption and Civic Crisis (Diagnosis)   1

1 Civic
 Distance: Digital Culture’s Intrusion on Trust,
Engagement, and Belonging  5
Paul Mihailidis

2 The
 Civic Media Observatory: Decoding Information
Networks with Narrative Analysis 15
Ivan Sigal

3 Upholding
 Digital Rights and Media Plurality: Does Self-­
regulation by Social Media Platforms Contravene Freedom of
Expression? 31
Ursula Smartt

4 Fake
 News Deconstructed Teens and Civic Engagement: Can
Tomorrow’s Voters Spontaneously Become News Literate? 45
Katerina Chryssanthopoulou

5 Peace,
 Public Opinion and Disinformation in Colombia:
Social Media and Its Role in the 2016 Plebiscite 63
Jesús Arroyave and Martha Romero-Moreno

6 Radical
 Interventions: Archaeology, Forensics and Montage 79
Pablo Martínez-Zárate

vii
viii Contents

Part II ‘Fake News’, Conspiracy, Propaganda (Diagnosis)  99

7 SAVE
 ME WHITE JESUS! Conspiracy and the Spectre of a
Folkloric, Alt-right Masculine Ideal101
Phil Barber

8 Fake
 News: Problems with—and Alternatives to—the Media
Literacy Project109
Adrian Quinn

9 Fact-Checking
 in Hong Kong: An Emerging Form of
Journalism and Media Education Amid Political Turmoil121
Masato Kajimoto

10 Confronting Coronavirus Propaganda139

Renee Hobbs and Igor Kanižaj

Part III Health, Science and Data (Diagnosis) 157

11 Gaslighting:
 Fake Climate News and Big Carbon’s
Network of Denial159
Antonio López

12 Using
 Disparagement Humour to Deal with Health
Misinformation Endorsers: A Case Study of China’s
Shuanghuanglian Oral Liquid Incident179
Xin Zhao and Yu Xiang

13 Citizens’
 Networks of Digital and Data Literacy191
Simeon Yates and Elinor Carmi

14 Re-thinking
 Media Literacy to Counter Misinformation207
Peter Cunliffe-Jones

15 Combatting
 Information Disorder: A South Asian
Perspective221
Dipak Bhattarai
 Contents  ix

Part IV Journalism (Response) 229

16 The
 Unhealed Wound: Official and Unofficial Journalisms,
Misinformation and Tribal Truth233
Graham Majin

17 What Happened Next?249

Jon Sopel

18 The
 Agenda-Setting Power of Fake News265
Fran Yeoman and Kate Morris

19 Can
 We Rebuild Broken Relationships? Examining
Journalism, Social Media, and Trust in a Fractured Media
Environment279
Patrick R. Johnson and Melissa Tully

20 Images,
 Fakery and Verification297
Susan Moeller and Stephen Jukes

Part V Media Literacy (Response) 315

21 Civic
 Intentionality First: A Tunisian Attempt at Creating
Social Infrastructure for Youth Representation319
Habib M. Sayah

22 S
 outh Island School—The Agence France Presse Affiliated
News Unit333
Iain Williamson

23 Intergenerational
 Approaches to Disinformation and
Clickbait: Participatory Workshops as Co-learning-Based
Spaces343
Maria José Brites, Ana Filipa Oliveira, and Carla Cerqueira

24 Digital
 Media Literacy with Sati (Mindfulness): The
Combining Approach Underlying the Thai Contexts357
Monsak Chaiveeradech

25 Media
 Literacy in the Infodemic371
Julian McDougall and Karen Fowler-Watt

Index381
 Notes on Contributors

Jesús Arroyave is a professor in the Department of Communication and

Journalism at the Universidad del Norte, in Barranquilla, Colombia. His
research interests focus on journalism and media studies, communication for
health and social change, communication research in Latin America and jour-
nalism for peace. His research has been published in journals such as Journalism,
Journalism Studies, International Journal of Communication, Feminist Media
Studies, Revista de Comunicación, Palabra Clave, Chasqui, Revista Diálogos
and Signo y Pensamiento. He has been visiting professor and scientific scholar
in Spain, Germany, the UK and the United States. [email protected]
Phil Barber is a PhD student, artist and lecturer from the UK. Researching
within Bournemouth University’s Centre for Excellence in Media Practice
located in Poole, Dorset, he also lectures in Fine Art. His current work explores
the relationships between misinformation, conspiracy and masculine identities,
using art practice as a tool for interrogation and understanding. P.Barber2@
lboro.ac.uk
Dipak Bhattarai is currently working for BBC Media Action as Journalism
Training Editor where he designs and implements digital, editorial and media
development strategies and training for BBC Media Action staffs and its media
partners in Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia and the Middle East. He has worked
in the arena of media and communication since 2000 in different countries first
as a journalist in print and television media and later as a trainer on media for
communication. His primary interest lies in the growing impact of misinforma-
tion in people and the ways to combat it. Dipak is based in Kathmandu, Nepal.
[email protected]
Maria José Brites is an associate professor at Lusófona University in Lisbon,
Portugal, and a member of the Board of the Centre for Research in Applied
Communication, Culture, and New Technologies (CICANT). She is the coor-
dinator of the project Jovens, Notícias e Cidadania Digital/Youth, News and
Digital Citizenship-YouNDigital (PTDC/COM-­OUT/0243/2021) and was

xi
xii NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

the coordinator of the European project SMaRT-EU (LC-01563446). Her

research interests include participatory methodologies, youth, journalism and
participation, audience studies, and news and civic literacy. mariajoseb-
[email protected]
Elinor Carmi (PhD) is Lecturer in Digital Society in the Sociology
Department at City University, London, UK. She is a digital rights advocate,
feminist, researcher and journalist who has been working on data politics, data
literacies, feminist approaches to media and data and tech policy. Currently
Carmi works on: (1) The Nuffield Foundation project ‘Developing a Minimum
Digital Living Standard’; (2) POST Parliamentary Academic Fellowship work-
ing with the UK’s Digital, Culture, Media & Sport Committee on her project
‘Digital literacies for a healthy democracy’. Her work contributes to emerging
debates in academia, policy and digital activism. [email protected]
Carla Cerqueira (PhD in Communication Sciences) is an assistant professor
at Lusófona University in Lisbon, Portugal, and a researcher at CICANT—
The Centre for Research in Applied Communication, Culture, and New
Technologies. She integrates diverse research projects and is the principal
investigator of the project ‘FEMGlocal—Glocal feminist movements: interac-
tions and contradictions’ (PTDC/COM-CSS/4049/2021) and the project
‘Network Voices: Women’s participation in development processes’ (COFAC/
ILIND/CICANT/1/2021). Her research interests include gender, femi-
nisms, intersectionality, NGOs, civic cultures and media studies. [email protected]
Monsak Chaiveeradech is a lecturer in the faculty of Journalism and Mass
Communication at Thammasat University, Bangkok, Thailand. He graduated
from the faculty of Media and Communication at Bournemouth University.
The title of his research is ‘Bridging digital media literacy with the Thai context
of “Sati”’ (mindfulness). His research interests include digital media literacy
combined with ‘Sati’ (mindfulness) as self-literacy for redefining and reframing
the glocalised concept, in particular, redesigning diverse approaches and cre-
ativity for social change. [email protected]
Katerina Chryssanthopoulou is PhD Researcher in Media and News Literacy
at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece, in the
Journalism and Media Department and published writer of fiction and non-­
fiction books. She holds MA in Cognitive Sciences; BA in Informatics; BA in
English Literature; and Diploma in Body Psychotherapy. Parallel to her research
on digital media and new literacies she works as Conference Interpreter, MIL
Trainer and Writing Coach. She practices Aikido. She is based in Athens,
Greece. [email protected]
Peter Cunliffe-Jones was a journalist for more than 25 years from 1990,
most of it for the AFP news agency, as a reporter in Western Europe, the
Balkans and West Africa, chief editor for Asia-Pacific and Head of Online News.
In 2012 he founded Africa’s first independent fact-checking organisation,
 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xiii

based at the University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa. He is today a senior

adviser to the International Fact-Checking Network and a visiting research fel-
low at and co-director of the Chevening African Media Freedom Fellowship at
the University of Westminster in London, UK. His research focuses on the
types and effects of misinformation and disinformation. P.Cunliffejones@west-
minster.ac.uk
Karen Fowler-Watt is Associate Professor of Journalism and Global
Narratives, research theme lead for journalism education in the Centre for
Excellence in Media Practice and Senior Fellow of Advance HE at Bournemouth
University in Poole, UK. As a former journalist for BBC News and Current
Affairs, she worked in the Middle East and the United States. She is a fellow of
the Salzburg Academy on Media and Global Change and currently working on
a journalism pedagogy project with Global Voices. Her research and publica-
tions focus on reporting marginalised voices, immersive storytelling and rei-
magining journalism education. [email protected]
Renee Hobbs is Professor of Communication at the University of Rhode
Island’s Harrington School of Communication and Media in Kingston, Rhode
Island (USA), where she co-directs the Graduate Certificate in Digital Literacy.
She is the founder of the Media Education Lab, whose mission is to advance
the quality of digital and media literacy education through scholarship and
community service. Learn more: www.mediaeducationlab.com, [email protected]
Patrick R. Johnson MJE, is a PhD candidate at the University of Iowa School
of Journalism and Mass Communication in Iowa City, the United States. His
work focuses on journalism’s role as a moral institution, particularly as it relates
to ethics, news literacy, education and deviance. He studies this as both bound-
ary and democracy building as forms of professionalisation. His research on
deviant media centres on media about sex and sexuality, as well as the broader
influence of tabloidisation and moral and media panic on journalism practice.
[email protected]
Stephen Jukes is Emeritus Professor in the Faculty of Media & Communication
at Bournemouth University, Poole, UK. He worked in Europe, the Middle
East and the Americas as a foreign correspondent, regional editor and Global
Head of News at the international news agency Reuters before moving into the
academic world. His research has focused on areas of objectivity and emotion
in news with an emphasis on affect, trauma and conflict journalism. He is a
trustee of the Dart Centre for Journalism & Trauma in Europe, and Vice
President of the Kurt Schork Memorial Fund, a charity which supports local
journalists, freelancers and fixers worldwide. [email protected]
Masato Kajimoto , PhD (Sociology), is based in Hong Kong as Associate
Professor of Practice in Journalism at the University of Hong Kong. Kajimoto
specialises in news literacy education and misinformation ecosystem research in
Asia. He founded a not-for-profit educational organisation ANNIE (Asian
xiv NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Network of News and Information Educators) to develop teaching and learn-

ing materials specific to the socio-political landscapes of Asian countries. As
part of the initiative, he has been running a student-led fact-­checking news-
room called Annie Lab on campus, which is a verified signatory of the
International Fact-Checking Network. [email protected]
Igor Kanižaj PhD, is Associate Professor at the University of Zagreb, in
Zagreb, Croatia, in the Faculty of Political Science, Department of Journalism
and Media Production. He is also Vice President of the Association for
Communication and Media Culture (DKMK). Together with his associates he
is coordinating the project Djecamedija.org, the biggest media education proj-
ect in Croatia. He is co-author of Paris Declaration on Media and Information
Literacy (UNESCO). He served as a vice dean for science and international
cooperation in the Faculty of Political Science and from 2016 to 2019 he was
national coordinator of EU Kids Online. [email protected]
Antonio López (PhD) is a founding theorist and architect of ecomedia liter-
acy and creator of the ecomedialiteracy.org website, which curates teaching
resources. His books on ecomedia literacy include: Ecomedia Literacy:
Integrating Ecology into Media Education; Greening Media Education: Bridging
Media Literacy with Green Cultural Citizenship; The Media Ecosystem: What
Ecology Can Teach Us About Responsible Media Practice; and Mediacology: A
Multicultural Approach to Media Literacy in the 21st Century. Currently he is
Associate Professor of Communications and Media Studies at John Cabot
University in Rome, Italy. Resources and writing are available at: https://
antonio-­lopez.com/, [email protected]
Graham Majin was a TV journalist and filmmaker for 30 years, 14 of which
were at the BBC. He is now Senior Lecturer in Documentary Journalism at
Bournemouth University in Poole, UK. Graham’s research methodology is
inter-disciplinary and fuses intellectual history, philosophy, cognitive psychol-
ogy and media theory. He recently gave evidence to the UK government’s
Select Committee on Communications and contributed to its report, Breaking
News? The Future of UK Journalism. [email protected]
Pablo Martínez-Zárate is a media artist and researcher living and working in
Mexico City, Mexico, considered as one of the foremost exponents of interac-
tive documentary in Latin America. He is Professor at Universidad
Iberoamericana Mexico City, where he founded the Iberoamerican
Documentary Lab, a platform for critical innovation in documentary art. His
work involves documentary films, web and interactive documentaries, video art
and installations that usually take a critical stance on memory, territory, body
and the archive.He has published several non-fiction books on the powers of
art in a world in crisis. [email protected]
Julian McDougall is Professor of Media Education, Head of the Centre for
Excellence in Media Practice and Principal Fellow of Advance HE at
 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xv

Bournemouth University in Poole, UK. He is the author of over 100 books,

articles, chapters and research reports and is co-editor of the Routledge
Research in Media Literacy and Education book series. Previous publications
include The Routledge International Handbook of Media Literacy Education
and Fake News Vs Media Studies: Travels in a False Binary. jmcdougall@bour-
nemouth.ac.uk
Paul Mihailidis is Professor of Civic Media and Journalism and assistant dean
in the School of Communication at Emerson College in Boston, MA, in the
United States, where he teaches media literacy, civic media and community
activism. He is founding programme director of the MA in Media Design,
senior fellow of the Emerson Engagement Lab and faculty chair and director of
the Salzburg Academy on Media and Global Change. paul_mihailidis@
emerson.edu
Susan Moeller is Professor of Media and International Affairs at Philip Merrill
College of Journalism, University of Maryland, College Park in Maryland in
the United States. Her books include Compassion Fatigue: How the Media Sell
Disease, Famine, War and Death. She was a senior fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy
School and a professor at Brandeis and Princeton universities. She co-founded
the Salzburg Academy on Media & Global Change in Austria. Her awards
include being named a Carnegie Scholar, twice a Fulbright Professor and the
State of Maryland’s Teacher of the Year. Her AM and PhD are from Harvard
and her BA is from Yale. [email protected]
Kate Morris teaches journalism at Goldsmiths University in London, UK. Her
research interests include news and media literacy and together with Fran
Yeoman she holds a British Academy/Leverhulme research grant to carry out
work looking at initiatives in this sector. Kate worked as a reporter, news editor,
sub editor and managing editor in local, regional and national news in the UK
and Australia before taking up her role at Goldsmiths in 2015. K.Morris@
gold.ac.uk
Ana Filipa Oliveira is a PhD student at University of Minho, CECS, in Braga,
Portugal, and an invited teacher and collaborator at Lusófona University. She
was part of the Portuguese team of the SMaRT-Eu project (LC-01563446).
She has collaborated with several NGOs and institutions promoting gatherings
and educational activities for children and young people focused on citizen-
ship, society, media and creativity. Her main research interests are media ­literacy
and education, youth citizenship and participation, creative media production
and participatory methodologies. [email protected]
Adrian Quinn is programme leader for International Journalism based in
Leeds at the University of Leeds, UK. A graduate of the Universities of Cardiff
and Glasgow, Adrian has been a media educator for over 20 years. He has con-
tributed to a number of journals and collections including The Age of Anxiety:
Conspiracy Theory & the Human Sciences (2001); Investigative Journalism:
xvi NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Dead or Alive? (2011) and Naming & Shaming: Drawing the Boundaries of
Disclosure (2012). He has also written for Open Democracy and The Times
Higher Education.
Martha Romero-Moreno is a lecturer at the Universidad Autónoma del
Caribe in Barranquilla, Colombia, and the Departmental Educational Fund of
Sucre. She has a bachelor’s degree in journalism and in modern languages, a
master’s degree in Communication. She is currently a PhD candidate in
Communication at Universidad del Norte. She has worked as a radio and print
journalist, designer and coordinator of media and technology training projects
for the Colombian Ministry of National Education. She has also been a pro-
moter of school communication initiatives, workshop leader of courses for
journalists covering the conflict of the International Committee of the Red
Cross. [email protected]
Habib M. Sayah is a consultant with Rhizomics, based in Tunis, Tunisia,
delivering strategic support to international development actors and INGOs
operating in the MENA region. He has 8 years’ experience in the design, deliv-
ery, monitoring and evaluation of technical assistance programmes and inter-
ventions in the fields of youth empowerment, strategic communications, media
development, and preventing violent extremism, and security sector reform.
Habib is Chevening Scholar and has graduated with distinction from the War
Studies Department at King’s College London where his research explored the
mobilisation strategies of Tunisian violent extremist organisations. He also
holds a master’s degree from Sorbonne Law School (France). habib@rhi-
zomics.io
Ivan Sigal is the executive director of Global Voices, a transnational, multilin-
gual community of writers, translators and rights activists who work to build
understanding across borders. He is based in Washington D.C. in the United
States. Sigal is also a photographer, media artist and writer known for his long-
term explorations of societies undergoing conflict or political transition, and
collaborative projects with communities to depict their own experiences. He
was Kluge Fellow at the Library of Congress in Washington D.C., a fellow at
the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University and is
a visiting fellow at Bournemouth University’s Centre for Excellence in Media
Practice. [email protected] or [email protected]
Ursula Smartt is Associate Professor of Law, New College of the Humanities
at Northeastern, London, UK. She specialises in media and entertainment law,
specifically in the regulation of online harm and safety, internet libel, UK court
reporting and music sampling and streaming. She holds a research fellowship
from the University of Surrey in media and entertainment law and lectures on
law degrees programmes at Northeastern University Boston, USA, and its
London Campus—New College of the Humanities. She is the author of Media
and Entertainment Law and Media Law for Journalists. ursula.smartt@nchlon-
don.ac.uk
 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xvii

Jon Sopel is a broadcast journalist, presenter and writer. He was most recently
the BBC’s North America editor (2014–2021), and previously Paris corre-
spondent, chief political correspondent and the main presenter of Global on
BBC World News. He is the author of several books on the presidency of
Donald Trump and co-presenter of the highly successful podcast Americas
with Emily Maitlis. In 2022, he announced that he was leaving the BBC to join
the London-based broadcast news organisation, Leading Britain’s
Conversation (LBC).
Melissa Tully (PhD, University of Wisconsin-Madison) is an associate profes-
sor in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of
Iowa, Iowa City, USA. Her research focuses on news literacy, audiences, misin-
formation, African media studies and civic participation. She has published
widely in these areas in journals like New Media & Society, Communication
Theory, Journalism, Mass Communication and Society, among others. mtlly@
uiowa.edu
Iain Williamson is the Head of Film and Media, as well as the Digital Literacy
Coordinator at South Island School, Deep Water Bay, part of the English
Schools Foundation in Hong Kong. Iain has been teaching since 1997 having
been Head of Media Studies at Kings Norton Girls’ School between 1998 and
2000. He completed 2 years with Voluntary Services Overseas in Nepal
between 2001 and 2003 working as a teacher trainer and a gender equity media
skills consultant before taking up his current post in 2004. More recently, Iain
qualified as an International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) ‘cer-
tified educator’ in 2021. [email protected]
Yu Xiang is Assistant Professor of Media Studies at the School of Journalism
and Communication of Shanghai University in Shanghai, China. Her current
research interests lie in the fields of international communication, digital jour-
nalism and cultural studies. Her recent publications include: ‘Dual Anxieties of
Technology and Labour: An Ethnographic Analysis of a University’s WeChat
Groups in China’ in The Political Economy of Communication (co-authored
with Ying Zhou) and ‘CCTV in Africa: Constructive Approach to Manufacturing
Consent’ in the Journal of African Media Studies (co-authored with Xiaoxing
Zhang). [email protected]
Simeon Yates is based in Liverpool where he is Professor of Digital Culture
and Associate Pro-Vice-Chancellor Research Environment and Postgraduate
Research at Liverpool University in the UK. He has undertaken research on
the social, political and cultural impacts of digital media since 1990. Since
2004 he has mainly focused on projects that address issues of digital inclusion
and exclusion. He is currently completing a project exploring citizens data lit-
eracy and has just commenced a project to explore a ‘Minimum Digital Living
Standard’ for UK households—both funded by the Nuffield Foundation.
[email protected]
xviii NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Fran Yeoman is head of the journalism department at Liverpool John Moores

University, Liverpool, UK, where she teaches practical journalism as well as
more theoretical modules looking at the ethics and practice of journalism in a
digital, democratic society. Along with Kate Morris she researches news and
media literacy in the UK, and together they work with government and the
media regulator Ofcom to inform policy in this area. Prior to entering aca-
demia in 2016, she worked as a news reporter and editor for newspapers includ-
ing The Times, The Independent and i. [email protected]
Xin Zhao is a lecturer at the Department of Communication and Journalism
of Bournemouth University in Poole, UK. She broadly studies media audience,
media representations and journalistic productions, and is particularly inter-
ested in the impact of social media on civic life. She has published in top jour-
nals including Journalism, Journalism Studies, International Journal of
Communication, Asian Journal of Communication and Global Media and
Communication. [email protected]
 List of Figures

Fig. 2.1 The problem 18

Fig. 2.2 Workflow 20
Fig. 2.3 Civic impact score 22
Fig. 2.4 Covid-19 graph for July-August 2020 media attention 24
Fig. 2.5 Russia media item 25
Fig. 2.6 Myanmar media item 1 26
Fig. 10.1 An example of Mind Over Media interactive features 145
Fig. 10.2 Genres of pandemic propaganda on the Mind Over Media
platform (N = 88)145
Fig. 10.3 Propaganda techniques used in pandemic propaganda (N = 88)148
Fig. 13.1 Box plot of the range of checking of social media content by user
types197
Fig. 13.2 Box plot of the range of checking and search engine content by
user types 198
Fig. 13.3 Data participation—helping others 201
Fig. 22.1 A screenshot taken from Justin Man’s video essay as part of the
News Unit, which makes use of the fact-checking tool: Trust
Servista338
Fig. 22.2 Our own breakdown of the CARS acronym used with students to
help support their work during the News Unit 339
Fig. 24.1 The overview of media literacy concept 359
Fig. 24.2 The overview of the sense of a circumstance 361
Fig. 24.3 The restructured conceptual framework (Chaiveeradech 2022) 362

xix
 List of Graphs

Graph 5.1 Frequency of publications 70

Graph 5.2 Frequency of users (only tweets without retweets) 71
Graph 5.3 Average probability of belonging to a class by day of publication 72
Graph 5.4 Networks and relationships between accounts 73

xxi
 List of Images

Image 6.1 Stills from the monopoly of memory 90

Image 6.2 The body is an archive 91
Image 6.3 Dissections over planes 92
Image 6.4 Research notes for forensic landscapes 93
Image 6.5 Web captures from forensiclandscapes.com 95

xxiii
 List of Tables

Table 5.1 Number of tweets observation window per user 71

Table 12.1 Themes and example posts using disparagement humour towards
the SHL oral liquid rumour 184
Table 13.1 Social media and web search checks 196
Table 13.2 Likelihood (%) of checking social media content 198
Table 13.3 Proportion (%) of checks depending on others or evaluating poster 199
Table 13.4 Likelihood (%) of checking search engine results 199
Table 23.1 List of participants in the workshops 349

xxv
 Introduction

A Challenging Context
The Palgrave Handbook of Media Misinformation combines work originating
from and/ or investigating different continents; it brings together academic
research, media industry perspectives and the work of educators and of activ-
ists. The idea for this edited collection shaped in the throes of a global pan-
demic, an event that, in the wake of the Trump presidency and the Brexit vote
in the UK, amplified existing issues around ‘fake news’. An ‘info-demic’ of
coronavirus misinformation, conspiracy theories and online abuse have com-
pounded distrust in the media, mirroring social trends that tend towards divi-
sion and lack of cohesion. There was brief respite in the heart of the COVID-19
crisis, when publics seemed to be turning to mainstream media (TV news in
particular) for information, but the issues around trust and active engagement
persist. In the early part of 2022, the final drafts of chapters came together, as
Russia invaded Ukraine, a shocking act of aggression that adds another chill-
ing dimension to the current phase of ‘information disorder’ (Wardle &
Derakshan, 2017). Clare Wardle and her fellow verification experts at First
Draft define information disorder as the toxic environment created by “the
many ways in which our information is polluted”—and conspiracy theories
have exacerbated the problem; societal fissures aggravated by the global pan-
demic that has further eroded social cohesion and underlined socio-economic
disparities. “Without truth, democracy is hobbled … those seeking democracy
must recognise it” notes Michiko Kakutani in her prescient The Death of Truth
(2018, 173).

Saturation and Weaponisation

The political ramifications of misinformation and threats to democracy are
increasingly well-documented, but there are other, less obvious, equally perni-
cious effects: referring to the pandemic, The World Health Organization dis-
cerns an ‘info-demic’:

xxvii
xxviii Introduction

an overabundance of information, both online and offline. It includes deliberate

attempts to disseminate wrong information to undermine the public health
response and advance alternative agendas of groups or individuals. Mis- and dis-
information can be harmful to people’s physical and mental health. (WHO, 23
September 2020)

Over-saturation impacts on humanity, on our health and wellbeing, so that

democracy and its institutions are not the only sick patients. Politicians have
resorted to Churchillian rhetoric and warlike metaphors when talking about
the fight against coronavirus: In 2020, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres
warned that the world is not only fighting coronavirus “but our enemy is also
the growing surge of misinformation” about Covid (Lederer, 2020), however,
information was already becoming weaponised prior to that. This ‘weaponisa-
tion’ of information by many governments, as well as abuse by an industry of
public relations companies, often under contract to political entities and actors
has spawned this toxic environment, this ‘information disorder’. It risks an
‘arms race’ of disinformation efforts, which is arguably a recipe for mutually
assured contamination of information environments in general as well as high
potential blowback (Posetti & Matthews, 2018: 2). This is exemplified by the
UK government’s underestimation of the influence of Russia in the 2016
Brexit referendum (Ruy, 2020).
So, the current context is a challenging one in which to curate a collection
of work such as this around the concept of misinformation. It requires ‘radical
acceptance’ of tension and the need to always use terms ‘under erasure’. The
concept assumes, or at least implies, an epistemology which many, even most
scholars and critical readers, will challenge. Elif Shafak reflects:

We live in an age in which we have too much information, but little knowledge,
and even less wisdom. These three concepts are completely different. In fact, an
overabundance of information, and the hubris that comes with it, is an obstacle
to attaining true knowledge and wisdom. (Shafak, 2022: 33)

Shafak was writing about Western apathy towards the plight of Uyghurs in
China, citing such as the biggest threat to democracy, a matter of days before
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Apathy towards atrocities, or the more active complicity of silence in return
for the maintenance of economic relations, is combined with a casual accep-
tance of populists’ ‘alternative facts’, each authoritarian regime or Western
populist gaining confidence from the other, while the neoliberal world observes
with mild concern but little urgency. In 2019, leading thinkers from 21
European countries who considered themselves to have been ‘too quiet’ to
date were prompted by a sense of looming crisis to craft a manifesto mourning
the loss of liberal values, warning against the rise of populism and declaring
that Europe as an idea was “coming apart before our eyes”. As Brexit took hold
 Introduction  xxix

in the UK and Europe witnessed a wave of political victories for the right, these
philosophers, historians and Nobel laureates urged that:

We must now will Europe or perish beneath the waves of populism. We must
rediscover political voluntarism or accept that resentment, hatred and their cor-
tege of sad passions will surround and submerge us.

The manifesto presented a wake-up call, in which the intelligentsia and the
philosophes claimed to discern challenges greater than anything seen since the
1930s in the prevailing ‘noxious climate’ that set the landscape for what they
perceived to be a “battle for civilisation”.

Sleepwalking into Information War? Russia’s Invasion

of Ukraine

Three years later, on 24 February 2022, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine presented

another wake-up call. In further seeking to understand how we got here, writ-
ers and journalists Timothy Snyder, Peter Pomerantsev and Carole Cadwalladr
have all warned of the paradoxical mindset in Russia whereby audiences come
to see media distortion as more honest by virtue of being openly false. This
‘baroque contradiction’ as Snyder calls it should seem now far more familiar to
people elsewhere in the world than it might have done in 2014. The role of
misinformation in Putin’s ‘hybrid war’ is not to be underestimated, producing
a dangerous mix when combined with political and military tactics in physical
and virtual spaces. Putin’s regime relied on the falsification of history as the
pretext to invade and recolonise Ukraine deploying misinformation to soften
up the terrain over a period of 8 years before the tanks rolled in. Russians turn-
ing to state media for information did not hear the words ‘war’, ‘attack’ or
‘invasion’ in coverage “carefully calibrated to show the war the Kremlin really
wanted to wage” (Roth, 2022): a ‘special operation’ to ‘de-Nazify’ Ukraine,
that would end swiftly with Russians the liberators. Pomerantsev’s (2015)
assertion that in Russia virtually everything is PR has been taken to dangerous
levels. Cracks in Putin’s core message were exposed when in the first weeks of
the conflict, Marina Ovsyannikova, a Russian news editor employed by state-­
owned television Channel One, displayed incredible courage, as she walked
across the backdrop of a live newscast, with a placard calling to “Stop the War”,
only to be arrested and any reporting of her protest was heavily edited or
expunged. In a BBC interview after her release, she claimed that Russians are
‘zombified’ by propaganda: “I understand it’s very hard … to find alternative
information, but you need to try to look for it” (Ovsyannikova quoted by
Davies, 2022). A number of journalists resigned from state-owned news organ-
isations following her high-stakes protest. In this misinformation war, punish-
ment and threat comprise key weapons in Putin’s regime’s armoury, with
alternative narratives from independent local media shutdown and global news
organisations, like the BBC and CNN temporarily suspending reporting in
xxx Introduction

Russia, after accusations of publishing ‘fake news’—the whipping boy for pop-
ulist leaders from east to west.

‘Fake News’
What is common to the Brexit campaign, the US election and the disturbing
depths of Youtube is that it is ultimately impossible to tell who is doing what, or
what their motives and intentions are. It’s futile to attempt to discern between
what’s algorithmically generated nonsense or carefully crafted fake news for gen-
erating ad dollars; what’s paranoid fiction, state action, propaganda or Spam;
what’s deliberate misinformation or well-meaning fact check. (Bridle, 2018: ch
9, para 51)

Back in 2018, a long time ago now for this topic, Bridle and many others
were challenging the notion of ‘fake news’ being either something new or any-
thing that Western democracy hadn’t been complicit in as ‘collateral damage’
from the economic benefits of platform capitalism. The business model has a
moral panic around fake news ‘baked in’ to a logic which invites us to blame
The Kremlin (justifiably, of course, as things have developed) but not Google
or the ‘mainstream media’:

To hear professional journalists complain about this problem without acknowl-

edging their own culpability further undermines one’s faith in expertise.
Democracy may or may not be drowning in fake news, but it’s definitely drown-
ing in elite hypocrisy. (Morozov, 2017: 2)

The term ‘Fake News’ came to widespread public attention during the 2016
US presidential campaign when inaccurate social media posts were spread to
large groups of users, a form of ‘viral’ circulation later attributed to sources in
Veles, Macedonia, leading to concerns about the automated trolling from fac-
tories of ‘bots’. The idea of ‘fake news’ was immediately both the subject of
rapid response research and challenged as an oxymoron. False information can-
not be categorised as news as defined by journalistic codes of practice, and thus
affording it the oxygen of academic attention plays into the hands of those who
wish to undermine mainstream media but also reproduces the ‘false binary’
between real and false that this handbook’s broader assessment of misinforma-
tion problematises.
Fake news is often presented as an aspect of a temporal ‘post-truth’ condition,
accelerated by the impact of the economic crash of 2008 and the failure of neo-
liberal politics to respond, whilst at the same time it has succeeded in dismantling
traditional conceptions of ‘the public sphere’, putting the workings of the market
in its place. The impact of the crash and the rise of new forms of digital and sur-
veillance capitalism on democracy, politics and the public sphere are assessed in
contributions by Moore (2018) and Zuboff (2019), whilst a comprehensive situ-
ating of post-truth in the history of globalised conspiracy discourse is provided
 Introduction  xxxi

by Consetino (2020). But in that space, more activist projects to respond to

post-truth and restore the public sphere can also be found, for example from
Rushkoff (2019) who sees the ‘post-truth’ situation as dehumanising, coercing
and controlling and calls for a humanist response.
In 2018 we all observed the incoming ‘perfect storm’ for fake news—eco-
nomic hardship, austerity politics, the subsequent failure of centrist politics to
satisfy disenfranchised publics, the erosion as a result of trust in democracy and
the opportunity provided by this for populists and dictators to offer false hope
through an attack on both public interest media and elected politicians as ‘the
establishment’. But in 2022, this seems like a permanent weather event, rather
like the long-term impacts of climate change are now perennial. As Carole
Cadwaller got in deeper and deeper to her investigations of attempts to influ-
ence elections, she warned:

It’s like a driver going past a car wreck; we’re transfixed by it, but we have no idea
what to do about it. We’re just at the beginning of recognizing the scale of this.
We’re in the middle of a huge transition, the fourth great communications transi-
tion after speech, writing and printing. And even breaking up Facebook is not
going to save us from this, it’s so much bigger than that. (Cadwaller, 2019: 13)

The overwhelming challenge for a critical and hopeful response—what to

‘do about it’—is that any sense of fake news ‘as a thing’, as something to iden-
tify and challenge, is false binary thinking. Stuart Hall’s legacy is in part his
critique of formalised media spaces that house ‘official discourse’ and thus, the
critical deconstruction of the idea of ‘the media’ itself involves understanding
that, in the sense of always being representational, gate-kept, ideological and
subject to bias arising from commercial and political imperatives, “all news is
fake news”. In COVID-19 infodemic times, or as we deal with a deadly hybrid
war with weaponised ‘fake news’, we can’t dispense with this critical lens in
favour of discerning ‘fact from fake’. What’s required is a more nuanced assess-
ment of the relationship between ontological truth and epistemological trust:

There seems to be a fundamental contradiction here. On the one hand, a healthy

democracy depends upon trust: we need to trust our elected representatives, and
we have to rely on trusted sources of information. Yet on the other hand, we
don’t want people to place blind faith in authority: we want people to be scepti-
cal. Too much trust is a bad thing, but so is too little. So how much trust do we
need—and especially for those of us concerned with education, how much trust
do we want to cultivate? Are people who are more ‘media literate’ more or less
likely to trust the media? Ultimately, I don’t think there is an easy answer here.
(Buckingham, 2019: 3)
xxxii Introduction

A Question of Trust
Journalists are often bemused as to why they are not the answer to fake news,
since journalism is traditionally seen as a fact-based route to distinguishing
truths from untruths. But as former editor of The Guardian Alan Rusbridger
(2018) laments in his memoir, the problem here is that journalists are not
themselves trusted: “If only people trusted journalism more, society would
have a system in place for dealing with fake news” (Rusbridger, 2018: 373). In
the first half of February 2022, the latest Edelman Trust survey revealed that a
majority of people around the world are worried that journalists are lying to
them: 67% of respondents said that they believe reporters intentionally try to
mislead with gross exaggeration or falsehood—an increase of 8% on its findings
in 2021. Trust levels in media across the world had fallen, with concern over
‘fake news’ at an all-time high (Majid, 2022) and 76% fearing information
could be weaponised—prophetic in the light of Putin’s ‘hybrid war’ waged in
Ukraine later that month.
Demagogic narratives feeding fear and spawning distrust in a media fash-
ioned by Trump as ‘the opposition’ have combined with audience disengage-
ment from mainstream media, turning instead to personalised social media
feeds, to create a heady cocktail. The result? Plummeting trust levels and rising
scepticism. This is not to say that a healthy dose of scepticism is a bad thing, as
Buckingham (2019) reminds us, critical evaluation of all information is crucial
for robust democratic discourse—but the so-called post-truth context is a chal-
lenging one, in which truth is an endangered species (Kakutani, 2018), trust
levels touch rock bottom—despite a temporary reprieve in the pandemic—and
indifference and/or lack of awareness hold sway. In 2016, Trump used his first
press conference as president to “wage war on journalism”; it rapidly became a
toxic relationship, as one of our contributors to this book, the BBC’s North
America editor Jon Sopel observed:

We were all inveterate liars, he said, while standing on a podium and claiming that
the number of electoral college votes was the highest since Ronald Reagan. One
of the journalists at this unforgettable news conference pointed out that both
Barack Obama and George H.W. Bush had won way more, and the president just
shrugged and blamed it on duff information. (Sopel, 2017: 321)

Building trust is supremely difficult in a world where lies become ‘alterna-

tive facts’ and facts are called ‘fake news’—and by those in power. No wonder
news consumers globally are distrustful, if less so when living with the simpler
information diet dished out by authoritarian regimes, such as in China or Saudi
Arabia (Edelman Trust Barometer, 2022).
Journalists have always acknowledged that they can only report an incom-
plete, but fact-based version of the truth (Rusbridger, 2018), tomorrow’s fish
and chip wrapper, but now journalism could be once again drinking in the last
chance saloon. Concern over fake news is higher: this is reassuring on one level,
 Introduction  xxxiii

if indicative of more media literate publics, but if a majority of news consumers

believe that the media is peddling lies, this is deeply concerning. As already
noted (Buckingham, 2019), there are no easy answers to a question of declin-
ing trust, but it does present a significant problem.

The Problem
So, to assume a comprehensible distinction between information and its dis-
torted variants is problematic, at best. Indeed, if we accept we live in an age of
‘information disorder’ then the entire point of such an awareness is that the
distinction has been lost, in more or less Baudrilardian terms and with the
Wachowski brothers as prophets of this moment, of this ‘vertigo of
interpretation’.
In advocating for an ‘ethics of difference’, the philosopher Jean Francois
Lyotard (1988) offered a reading of Herzog’s Where the Green Ants Dream as
an example of his ‘differend’, a state of thinking where two completely irrecon-
cilable language games come into conflict, with it being impossible to judge
either without recourse to the idioms of the other. In this case, the story is
about an Australian mining company wishing to dig, for profit and in the name
of progress, into land occupied by Aborigines who believe, without doubt, that
the green ants who live in the land dream, and it is their dreaming that main-
tains the universe. Lyotard offers this as, we can probably assess, a positive
example of how western metaphysics, scientific rationalism and colonial episte-
mologies need to give ground to alternative, hitherto marginalised truth-
claims, advocating his micro-politics of ‘parology’, an ethical process where
justice is the outcome of different rules for each differend, different, shifting
and fluid notions of truth and knowledge, changing every time they are
enacted, locally situated and contingent and de-centred.
This is a seductive discourse, and has been influential in the kinds of post-
structuralist, deconstructive thinking that media, cultural studies and commu-
nication scholars on, broadly speaking, ‘the left’ have put to work in their
research, writing and partnerships with activists. But we can see where this is
going. The differend has ‘come true’, as with Baudrillard’s hyper-reality and
Foucault’s truth-knowledge-power, in, for these communities, a very bad way.
For today’s protectors of the green ants, look to Q Anon, the Brexit campaign,
Trump and Putin. Most theses on the ‘decline of the West’ cite the acceptance
of relativist truth and ‘culture wars’ as a significant factor, and—to return to
Lyotard—the jury is very much out with regard to the efficacy of fact-­checking,
media and information literacies for the preservation of democracy if publics
are insufficiently inclined to protect it. As Biesta puts it, “Democrats are not
born, they are made” (2018).
The ‘groundwork’ for the kinds of ontological upheaval we have been wit-
nessing first-hand during this project, as we moved through Brexit and Trump
to Covid and now Ukraine, is often understood as politically strategic. Attacking
experts and intellectuals, claiming to speak for the disenfranchised, working the
xxxiv Introduction

algorithms to disorientate, these are all, by now, familiar features of what we

casually refer to as ‘the playbook’:

We are living through a period of pop-up populism, where each social and politi-
cal movement redefines ‘the many’ and ‘the people’; where we are always recon-
sidering who counts as an ‘insider’ or an ‘outsider’; where what it means to
belong is never certain, where bubbles of identity burst, crack and are then
reformed as something else. And in this game the one who wins will be the one
who can be most supple, rearranging the iron filings of disparate interests around
new magnets of meaning. (Pomerantsev, 2019: 215)

And yet, we also live in a time where it is not only possible, but required, for
philosophers to try to help us understand the conditions of possibility for our
existential working through of ‘Reality+’ (Chalmers, 2022). This is a moment
in which attempting to distinguish between real and simulation, a la The Matrix
and postmodernism, even for the purpose of arguing that we cannot, is out-
moded. Facebook’s ‘Meta’ may not be the tipping point, but, argue Chalmers
and others, we are already in a state of extended reality, beyond any sense of
virtual which requires a relation with what it simulates. If so, then, in looking
for the kinds of educational response, to equip emerging citizens with the criti-
cal capacity to read this environment as free agents and thrive in it with others
in public and civic spaces, then the kind of media literacy people will need to
learn is going to need to involve reading reality itself as textual, as a genre (Ahn
& Pena, 2021). But this will also require a critical understanding of the ‘archi-
tecture’ of ‘deceitful media’ (Natale, 2021) we now not only tolerate but
enthusiastically adopt in our everyday lives. As we live with artificial intelli-
gence, virtual and augmented, extended realities, we will need to be at one ‘in
the affordance’ and at the same time critically engaging with it:

Our vulnerability to deception is part of what defines us. Humans have a distinct
capacity to project intention, intelligence, and emotions onto others. This is as
much a burden as a resource. After all, this is what makes us capable of entertain-
ing meaningful social interaction with others. But it also makes us prone to be
deceived by non-human interlocutors that simulate intention, intelligence and
emotions. (Natale, 2021: 132)

Media Literacy: Beyond Solutionism

Many of the contributions to this collection are solutions focused and media
literacy is often presented as such, quite rightly, as signposted by our inclusion
of a section on it. But the kind of critical media literacy which can foster genu-
ine, sustainable change in the media ecosystem is a long-term commitment,
and very much at odds with current policy discourse in much of the world.
Such discourse, and the attendant commitment to funding and resource, tends
to favour a reactive ‘treatment’ of the effects of misinformation, as opposed to
a critical media literacy that builds and then boosts resistance prior to infection,
 Introduction  xxxv

building critical antibodies, more like a vaccine than an antiviral medicine, to

use the obvious analogy at the time of writing.
In our own research, we have developed a theory of change with regard to
media literacy for resilience to misinformation. This framework has four over-
lapping elements:

• Access (the means to be included as a full citizen in a diverse media

ecosystem);
• Awareness (of how media texts and information sources represent reality);
• The Capability to use this media literacy for particular purposes in civic
and social life and, crucially;
• A desire for positive Consequences in our own media behaviours and in
our expectations of the media and information environment—not simply
to take a position in a ‘false binary’ between true and fake, but for our
media to be plural and diverse.

Those consequences are far more than mere skills or competences, they
require an active desire for our media to promote equality and social justice. If
this sounds like an inevitable result, then that assumption is the crux of the
problem, part of the same crisis of complacency, the same walking in our sleep,
that has enabled and energised the protagonists of misinformation as the lack
of accredited, resourced and sustainable media literacy education on ‘home
fronts’ has been coupled with a detached ‘watching brief’ on misinformation
on a global scale.
The challenges of curation are significant and this handbook can only pres-
ent a snapshot, but we hope it makes a useful contribution in difficult times.
Through the five parts, we group the work into overlapping and interesting
themes and share perspectives on media misinformation from a deliberately
eclectic blend of approaches, from journalism, the outcomes of research, prac-
titioner interventions, lived experiences and experimental responses. The writ-
ing brought together in this handbook is global, with case studies from or
about Colombia, Mexico, Thailand, Hong Kong, China, Nepal, Tunisia, sub-­
Saharan Africa, the US, Europe and the UK.

Part I: Democracy, Disruption and Civic

Crisis (Diagnosis)
This first part offers diagnosis and provides a framework for the issues covered
in subsequent parts. We live in an age of disruption, in which the role of big-­
tech is under scrutiny for the threats it poses to democracy and free speech,
including the war over digital rights and the contemporary frontline of disin-
formation. In 2019 the UK government’s report into ‘fake news’ and disinfor-
mation concluded that the polarising impact of fake news was unlikely to
recede, placing responsibility for moves towards greater transparency with the
xxxvi Introduction

big-tech companies. It noted that, whilst “propaganda and politically-aligned

bias” are nothing new, this activity had been “hugely magnified by information
technology and the ubiquity of social media” (DCMS report, 18 February
2019). It emphasised the importance of human agency and a plurality of voices,
important to counter the propagation of populist and extremist narratives and
so that “people stay in charge of the machines” (p. 6). Internet-watchers in the
US observed that the algorithmic spread of hate speech, disinformation and
conspiracy theories online had exacerbated political polarisation, enabled white
supremacist groups and seriously impaired America’s response to the
COVID-19 crisis (McNamee, 2020). In the wake of the Cambridge Analytica
scandal (2018) calls for the regulation of Facebook have got louder, but are
countermanded by the freedom of expression arguments. Issues of digital
rights, privacy versus the public interest frame the debates about civic empow-
erment and response to crisis in the face of fake news. This part also looks
specifically at and deconstructs fake news, the relationship of misinformation to
power and the ways in which the fake news phenomenon has exacerbated—and
shone a spotlight on—inequality in society. The global pandemic provides a
relevant context for an examination of the relationship between misinforma-
tion and marginalisation. In offering diagnosis of the disruptive impact of the
disinformation crisis, this part also considers issues of connectivity in civic life
and the role played by radical interventions in partisan environments where
traditional narrative strategies are blocked, for example in Latin America.

Part II: ‘Fake News’, Conspiracy, Propaganda (Diagnosis)

This part moves on to explore these ‘variants’ of misinformation in detail and
in context. ‘Information disorder’ is complex and a sum of many moving parts,
including confusion, cynicism, fragmentation of public discourse, irresponsibil-
ity of powerful actors and a pervasive apathy in the face of the situation. This
part looks at the enduring features of conspiracy thinking and strategic, delib-
erate propaganda as well as the more idiosyncratic elements of ‘fake news’.
These features are often performative, as theorised most notably for our frame
of reference by Hannah Arendt (2009) and Judith Butler (2013). When the
latter writes “The ‘We are here’ that translates that collective bodily presence
might be reread as ‘We are still here’”, meaning: “We have not yet been dis-
posed of” (p. 196), we are minded to think of Occupy, protest camps (see
Frenzel, Feigenbaum and McCurdy, 2014), the ‘Arab Spring’ or Extinction
Rebellion. But this performative bodily presence is, in these times, equally or
more prominent in the Capitol Hill riots or in the virtual spaces inhabited by
Q-Anon, or indeed in the hybrid zones between and across them. These forms
of misinformation involve deliberate, more systematic attempts to manipulate
and coerce, to influence attitudes and confuse perception, but they are able to
do so by working in the conditions of possibility for anxiety and indifference to
truth. Conspiracy thinking has never been far from the surface in the age of
networked, anonymised truth claiming. Resurgent, perhaps, during a
 Introduction  xxxvii

pandemic, but equally harnessed for political ends by populist campaigners and
subsequently presidents and prime ministers, conspiracy thinking is another
configuration of elements—false equivalence, fake authority, patterning coinci-
dences, the invisible ‘other’, intuition over reflection, reassurance in times of
uncertainty and confusion through socially constructed expertise (see Robson,
2020), we can see this play out frequently in these times:

Citizens are at increased risk of contracting a dangerous illness, and their usual
freedoms are heavily constrained by governmental lockdown measures to reduce
the spread of the virus. In their minds, conspiracy theorists have connected these
dots. (Van Proojen, 2020)

Paul Mihaildis (2017), who contributes a chapter to this collection, pre-­

empted some of these developments with an assessment of the ‘civic agency
gap’ which we might now understand as having been occupied by right-wing,
conspiracy thinking, citing the crisis as “a direct result of a civic culture that has
normalized spectacle, and become less trustworthy of media institutions, and
that uses digital media to perpetuate and promote concern, spectacle and dis-
trust” (Mihaildis & Votty, 2017: 441).
But equally, we see powerful operations of “strategic ignorance” (McGoey,
2019). The intersection of knowledge and power is often characterised by
more than stating ‘known unknowns’ but also in the act of deliberately not
knowing, as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom during the production
of this text so adeptly performs. Propaganda, in this sense, becomes a duality
of manipulating information and the deliberate absence of knowledge as a
political asset. This is most commonly understood, and increasingly in public
discourse and, we would argue, accepted to a disturbing extent in the act of
‘Gaslighting’, which is explored with specific regard to climate change misin-
formation in the next part.

Part III: Health, Science and Data (Diagnosis)

This part continues the assessment of the complex nature and diverse range of
misinformation by presenting current writing on the relationship between
public health, environmental crises and misinformation and also explores the
role of data in misinformation, but also with regard to strategies for ‘min-
ing back’.
With regard to climate change, the separation between misinformation and
‘mainstream media’ is especially difficult, with political backlash discourse
emerging about ‘net zero dogma’ into the bargain. The resurgent practice of
‘greenwashing’, whereby politicians and corporations are, it is argued, enabled
by media to create the impression of environmentally friendly activity when the
opposite is the reality, a classic case study in ‘gaslighting’, the term now in com-
mon parlance, but referring back to the 1941 film in which Ingrid Bergman’s
character is subjected to psychological abuse by her husband, who interferes
xxxviii Introduction

with the gaslights in their home and denies seeing the changes in the light this
causes. In time, she comes to doubt her own perception of reality, hence the
application of the phrase to describe the function of misinformation in sowing
confusion.
This climate change gaslighting is perpetuated by an alliance of ‘Big Media’
and Big Carbon as opposed to extreme conspiracy thinkers at the margins of
public discourse. Media Lens accuse the mainstream media of complicity in the
climate crisis to the extent that “the major news media are an intrinsic compo-
nent of this system run for the benefit of elites. The media are, in effect, the
public relations wing of a planetary-wide network of exploitation, abuse and
destruction. The climate crisis is the gravest symptom of this dysfunctional
global apparatus” (Edwards & Cromwell, 2018: 208).
During the pandemic, the intersection of the health of the media and infor-
mation ecosystem and public health itself was highly charged. What we know
at this point (2 years into the pandemic at the time of writing) is that the politi-
cal nature of public health decisions is widely accepted as the order of things
and whilst this may have been ever thus, publics were rarely aware of it to this
extent. But also, we know that individual and societal responses to public
health decisions being made in urgent real time are ideological, with the same
epidemiological data used for competing arguments. In the middle ground,
between those claiming ‘covid hoax’ or anti-vax demonstrators on the one
hand, and those in favour of stringent measures to protect the vulnerable, often
claiming the moral high ground, were many shades of more complex and
nuanced ‘truth-claims’ about health, economy, science, data and political com-
munications. Everything was up for grabs in the media and information space,
but this was not only about the science, it was also about ‘capitalist realism’
(Fisher, 2009). Every argument about working from home, online education
and the future of human interaction in the ‘normal new’, as Bennett and
Jopling describe it (2021), oscillated around the media representation of the
‘essential worker’ and the precarious under-class who were expected, or not, to
put their livelihoods at risk for the greater public good, a discourse of ‘subsidis-
ing normalcy’, described by Rubin and Wilson (2021) as “the expectation that
the working class would ultimately suppress their concerns about the coronavi-
rus and lay their lives on the line to sustain the illusion that capitalism will
revert to its prior successes” (2021: 56). Returning to Bennett and Jopling,
their ‘normal new’ observes the understandable, but ultimately sobering, desire
of people to retreat from the brave new world futuring we mobilised at the
start of the pandemic, in favour of this very reversion to what we now see as
stability, even though some 2 years ago we were embracing its disruption:

The pandemic is made up of both the virus and our responses to it. In fact, the
promise of a return to ‘normal’ manifests as both a forlorn hope and a consider-
able threat: being lost is ever more attractive than being found. (Bennett &
Jopling, 2021: 1)
 Introduction  xxxix

Where health, science, climate, media and information converge is in the

ways our lives are visualised in data. Again, this is nothing new, but what is is
our obligation to interpret the mediated datafication of our existence, and the
various threats to it. Critical data scholars find more prominence for their work
in the fields of media, communications and cultural studies, and likewise with
the work of data journalists. Nearly a decade back, Gitelman (2013) set out a
framework for analysing data as representation, which is never ‘raw’ but always
speaking to human values and therefore “needs to be understood as framed
and framing” (2013: 5) in order to “expand representations of personhood
beyond traditional statistical ways of symbolizing people in data visualizations”
(Alamalhodaei et al., 2020: 362).
This third part is still, then, concerned with our collating and curating a
wide ranging and eclectic, though focused, set of evaluations of what we are
thinking about when we talk and write about media misinformation. It serves
to extend our reach, not only geo-culturally, but also, into those connecting
fields of science, health and data. It concludes our diagnostic parts, as we turn
our attention to how ‘the media’ itself (in the form of journalism) and educa-
tion (in the form of ‘media literacy’) can offer responses to the crisis.

Part IV: Journalism (Response)

This part focuses on journalism to consider the impact of ‘information disorder’
on the practice of journalism—its normative values of truth, accuracy and objec-
tivity, and journalistic responses to the misinformation crisis. The aftermath of
the Trump Presidency in the US scopes out a wider landscape against which to
analyse the effects of fake news on the modus operandi of news reporters, fash-
ioned as ‘the opposition’ and embattled in an era of distrust. Social media is a
crucial tool in the dissemination of news, but the dissonance and fracture that
prevail in the current media environment are arguably also complicated by the
ubiquity of social media—where everyone is a storyteller—and the attraction of
personalised news feeds as trustworthy sources. Challenges presented by the
imperative to verify, the abundance of fakes, deep fakes, the growth of AI and the
agenda-setting power of fake news, all in the context of a shrinking business
model and a voracious 24/7 news environment complicates the long-term out-
look for journalism. Participatory media offers a partial response to crisis, also
new modes of storytelling—many have engaged with news from Ukraine via
Tik-Tok for example (Chayka, 2022)—yet there is a precarity evident across all
journalisms: not only mainstream news organisations, but also community
reporting, local and regional, national and international.
As we have noted already, trust in institutions and media organisations is
now a rare commodity (Kakutani, 2019; Rusbridger, 2018) with journalism
often seen as core to the problem rather than the solution (Brants, 2013). This
leads to anxiety for journalists about lack of trust in their work: A deluge of
mis/disinformation and conspiracy theory about coronavirus has further com-
plicated the journalistic imperative to report with accuracy, fairness and
xl Introduction

impartiality. These observations are supported in a recently published Open

Society Foundation for South Africa report (2021), that noted the “out-sized
and positive role” played by journalism in the pandemic in a context of eco-
nomic precarity and the potential for misinformation to flourish in the vacuum
created by the demise of local news.
The inherent danger here is that, despite best efforts, voices that were
already marginalised become more voiceless—a stark illustration of this was
evident in the Grenfell Fire tragedy in the UK in 2017, where the absence of a
robust, inquisitive local media enabled rumour and misinformation to flourish,
whilst any remnants of trust in journalists or reliance on them to hold power to
account rapidly disappeared. The veteran broadcaster Jon Snow, from Channel
4 News in the UK, noted to his shame as he arrived at Grenfell that he was part
of a disconnected elite of journalists, angrily criticised by the residents for their
negligence. Moreover, as he observed, “The dissonance evident in the Grenfell
tragedy was exacerbated by the media’s framing of the story as it unfolded…
people were talking about overstayers, immigrants. This was not true at all”
(Snow in Fowler-Watt & Jukes, 2020: 33). Poor journalism practice resulted in
reinforcing stereotypes and the publication of unverified information—journal-
ism can often be the problem as much as it can offer a response or a solution.
Against this background, the weight of responsibility borne by journalists,
striving to report the truth, is significant. Journalists reporting on the frontline
of the COVID-19 crisis have been operating in an extremely fraught and chal-
lenging context, characterised by a precarity that they are also experiencing
themselves, in terms of personal safety, trauma and economic security, whilst
seeking to tell the stories of others affected by coronavirus, to hold officials in
power accountable for their handling of the crisis and, importantly, to purvey
reliable and accurate public health information to keep citizens safe. This can
give rise to a sense of moral injury (Feinstein & Storm, 2017), of helplessness
and distress:

The heightened interest in a conception of moral injury derived from combat

experience is consistent with some familiar rhetorical tropes of the pandemic: talk
of fight, battle, front lines, winning the war and circumstances said to be unprec-
edented. (Shale, 2020)

This professional and personal precarity has a destabilising effect on demo-

cratic society, dependent on robust, healthy, accurate and effective communica-
tion and media. In the heart of the pandemic, a survey conducted by the
International Center for Journalists (ICFJ) and the Tow Center for Digital
Journalism at Columbia University (Posetti et al., 2020) raised ‘red flags’ for
journalism: it collated responses from 1400 journalists in 125 countries, with
81% saying they were working in a context where dis/misinformation height-
ened their sense of precarity. The challenges for journalism and journalists as
first responders in the misinformation crisis are therefore complex and mani-
fold, with the long-term prognosis uncertain.
 Introduction  xli

Part V: Media Literacy (Response)

Media literacy’s prominence as part of the response to misinformation is widely
accepted. In application, models for media literacy tend to move through
stages, from equal and safe access to digital media to awareness of the source,
critical reading of media representation and finally the active, creative and/or
civic making of media (see UNESCO, 2013). But the more agentive uses of
media literacy for positive change are the most elusive to shorter term media
literacy projects because this requires more longitudinal evidence of media lit-
eracy in society, beyond education and also with a commitment to good con-
sequences, as opposed to the gaining of competences which can be, and often
are, at this point in history, used for negative ends. In other words, they address
the paradox that the problems with media ecosystems are often not caused by
a lack of media literacies, but rather the harmful uses of them. To move beyond
skills and competences alone to focus on the uses of media literacy, using Sen’s
capability approach (2008) emphasises the significance of active media behav-
iours and decision-making and offers more sensitivity to variations and local
contexts. This more dynamic understanding of media literacy as an agentive
capability can offer a conduit for social praxis and the potential to give voice,
reduce marginality and develop communicative resilience (Buzzanell, 2010)
and the capacity for citizens to act to make positive change in media ecosys-
tems. Therefore, the significant challenge is to promote, resource and sustain
this kind of approach to media literacy with such a theory of change in educa-
tion and lifelong learning which can, over time, increase publics’ resilience to
information disorder, with supplementary benefits for governance and rights;
health and wellbeing and humanitarian responses to climate change.
As media literacy raises people’s expectations for access to a trustworthy and
diverse media ecosystem then exposure to misinformation reduces and resil-
ience to it increases, when people are exposed. Increased access to positive
advocacy media and more diverse and inclusive media representation increases
trust in media. Critical media literacy enables evaluation and assessment of the
accuracy of information, representation of groups within the society, ideology
in media discourse and the persuasive intentions of content. Again, this height-
ened awareness of media representing and more self-reflexive awareness of bias
increase resilience and mitigate against the media environment in which misin-
formation can thrive. As the ecosystem is strengthened through increases in
media literacy, this enables people to assess and deal with resilience to content
abundance and to act positively in response to and with media and informa-
tion. Mediated societal engagement increases, with benefits to public health,
equality and diversity, climate literacy and with aligned reductions in polarised
discourse. As higher-level media literacy moves from awareness of media repre-
sentation and the persuasive/ideological context of information, the capability
to act differently and positively in the media ecosystem combines with an
understanding of the consequences of how people act in their social media
lives, share their data and subject ourselves to socio-technical algorithms and
xlii Introduction

surveillance. The ultimate goal of media literacy, with all these things com-
bined, is to increase awareness of all conditions in which all media, information
and data are produced and circulated to the extent that information disorder is
reduced through the development of ‘critical antibodies’.
To these ends, this part explores, from an evidence-base, media literacy as a
response to misinformation from a range of approaches and international con-
texts. We include a meta review of media literacy work during the COVID-19
infodemic; accounts of youth-led alternative media in Tunisia; media literacy
linked to Thai mindfulness; a cross-EU project to promote social media resil-
ience across and between generations and a school programme in Hong Kong.
The work in this part is very much ‘beyond solutionism’, in favour of a set of
nuanced, situated and ‘living’ media literacies. These literacies are not sug-
gested as neutral skills or competencies, assumed to be in themselves always-­
already positive and innately beneficial to the project of reducing information
disorder. Rather, in their more ethnographic ‘g/local’ modalities, they directly
link media literacy to positive change in the media ecosystem.
In focusing on diagnosis and response, the chapter authors in this volume
bring a wide range of expertise, backgrounds and reference points—cultural,
political and socio-economic—to their contributions. Each has considered
context, current research in the field and provided a case study, before drawing
some tentative conclusions.

References
Alamalhodaei, A., Allberda, A., & Feigenbuam, A. (2020). Humanizing data through
‘data comics’: An introduction to graphic medicine and graphic social science. In
M. Engebretsen & H. Kennedy (Eds.), Data visualization in society. Amsterdam
University Press.
Arendt, H. (2009). The promise of politics. Edited by Jerome Kohn. Schocken.
Bennett and Jopling—in Peters, M, Jandric, P., & Hayes, S. (2022). Bioinformational
philosophy and postdigital knowledge ecologies. Springer.
Biesta, G. (2018). Teaching uncommon values: Education, democracy and the future
of Europe.
Brants, K. (2013). Trust, cynicism and responsiveness. In C. Peters & M. Broersma
(Eds.), Rethinking journalism—Trust and participation in a transformed news land-
scape. Routledge.
Bridle, J. (2018). New dark age: Technology and the end of the future. Verso.
Brusells; NESET II and EENEE conference, 22.11.18.
Buckingham, D. (2019). The media education manifesto. Polity.
Bulter, J., & Athanasiou, A. (2013). Dispossession: The performative in the politi-
cal. Polity.
Buzzanell, P. M. (2010). Resilience: Talking, resisting, and imagining new normalcies
into being. Journal of Communication, 60, 1–14.
Cadwalladr, C. (2022). Putin’s information war was launched in 2014. The
Observer, 06.03.22.
Chalmers, D. (2022). Reality+: Virtual worlds and the problems of philosophy. Allen Lane.
 Introduction  xliii

Chayka, K. (2022). Watching the World’s “First Tik Tok War”. The New Yorker, 03.03.22.
Cosentino, G. (2020). From pizzagate to the great replacement: The globalization of
conspiracy theories. In Social media and the post-truth world order. Palgrave Pivot.
Davies, C. (2022, Thursday 17). Marina Ovsyannikova: Protesting journalist says
Russians zombified by propaganda. BBC News online. Available at: https://www.
bbc.co.uk/news/world-­europe-­60778554
Edelman Trust Barometer. (2022). The cycle of distrust. Available at: https://www.edel-
man.com/trust/2022-­trust-­barometer
Edwards, D., & Cromwell, D. (2018). Propaganda Blitz: How the corporate media dis-
tort reality. Pluto Press.
Frenzel, F., Feigenbaum, A., & McCurdy P. (2014). Protest camps: An emerging field
of social movement research. The Sociological Review, 62(3):457–474. https://doi.
org/10.1111/1467-­954X.12111
Feinstein, A., & Storm, H. (2017). The emotional toll on Journalists covering the refu-
gee crisis. Available from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/
files/2017-­07/Storm%20and%20Feinstein%20-­%20Emotional%20Toll.pdf
Fisher, M. (2009). Capitalist realism: Is there no alternative? Zero Books.
Gitelman, L. (2013). Raw data is an oxymoron. MIT Press.
House of Commons. ‘Disinformation and fake news’, final report of the House of
Commons Digital Media, Culture and Sport Committee. Published 18 February
2019, Available at: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/
cmcumeds/1791/1791.pdf
Kakutani, M. (2018). The death of truth: Notes on falsehood in the age of Trump. Tim
Duggan Books.
Lederer, E. (2020, September 23). World leaders criticize haphazard response to pan-
demic. The Washington Post. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/
world/national-­s ecurity/world-­l eaders-­c riticize-­h aphazard-­r esponse-­t o-­
pandemic/2020/09/23/a404317a-­fdfd-­11ea-­b0e4-­350e4e60cc91_story.html
Majid, A. (2022, January 19). Almost seven in ten people worry they are being lied to
by journalists according to latest Edelman trust survey. Press Gazette. Available at:
h t t p s : / / p r e s s g a z e t t e . c o . u k / a l m o s t -­s e v e n -­i n -­t e n -­p e o p l e -­w o r r y -­
they-­a re-­b eing-­l ied-­t o-­b y-­j ournalists-­a ccording-­t o-­l atest-­e delman-­t r ust-­
survey/
McDougall, J. (2019). Fake news vs media studies: Travels in a false binary. Palgrave.
McIntyre, L. (2018). Post-truth. MIT Press.
McNamee, R. (2020, July 29). Big tech needs to be regulated: Here are 4 ways to curb
disinformation and protect our privacy. TIME Magazine. Available at: https://time.
com/5872868/big-­tech-­regulated-­here-­is-­4-­ways/
Mihailidis, P., & Viotty, S. (2017). Spreadable spectacle in digital culture: Civic expres-
sion, fake news, and the role of media literacies in “post-fact” society. American
Behavioral Scientist, 61(4), 441–454.
Morozov, E. (2019). Capitalism’s new clothes. The Baffler. https://thebaffler.com/
latest/capitalisms-­new-­clothes-­morozov, 4.2.19.
Pomerantsev, P. (2015). Nothing is true and everything is possible. Faber and Faber
Pomerantsev, P. (2019). This is not propaganda: Adventures in the war against reality.
Faber and Faber.
Posetti, J., Bell, E., & Brown, P. (2020). Journalism and the pandemic: A global snap-
shot of impacts. Available at: https://towcenter.columbia.edu/content/
journalism-­and-­pandemic-­global-­snapshot-­impacts
xliv Introduction

Posetti, J., & Matthews, A. (2018). A short guide to the history of fake news and disinfor-
mation. International Center for Journalists.
Roth, A. (2022). What Russians are being told about the war in Ukraine. The Guardian.
Today in Focus podcast, 04.03.22. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/what-­
r u s s i a n s -­a r e -­b e i n g -­t o l d -­a b o u t -­t h e -­w a r-­i n -­u k r a i n e / i d 1 4 4 0 1 3 3 6 2 6 ? i =
1000552884628
Rubin, D., & Wilson, F. (2021). A time of covidiocy: Media, politics and social
upheaval. Brill.
Rusbridger, A. (2018). Breaking news: The remaking of journalism and why it matters
now. Canongate.
Rushkoff, D. (2018). Team human. W.W. Norton.
Ruy, D. (2020, July 21). Did Russia influence Brexit? Center for Strategic and
International Studies.
Sen, A. K. (2008). Capability and well-being. In D. M. Hausman (Ed.), The philosophy
of economics (3rd edn, pp. 270–293).
Shafak, E. (2022, February 17). The Uyghurs’ plight shows the biggest threat to
democracy is Western apathy. New Statesman.
Shale, S. (2020) Moral injury and the pandemic: reframing what it is, who it affects and
how care leaders can manage it. British Medical Journal. Available at: https://
bmjleader.bmj.com/content/4/4/224
Snow, J. (2020). Disconnected or connected? In K. Fowler-Watt & S. Jukes, S. (Eds.),
New journalisms: Rethinking practice, theory and pedagogy. Routledge.
Snyder, T. (2018). The road to unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America. Random House.
Sopel, J. (2017). If only they didn’t speak English: Notes from Trump’s America. Penguin
Random House
Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder Toward an interdisciplin-
ary framework for research and policymaking. Council of Europe.
Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the
new frontier of power. Public Affairs.
 PART I

Democracy, Disruption and Civic Crisis

(Diagnosis)

Part I Introduction: Karen Fowler-Watt

This part is framed by the current age of “fundamental disruption and detach-
ment” (Stiegler, 2019), characterised by increasingly disordered media ecosys-
tems and fragile socio-political entities. In attempting to navigate this prevailing
civic crisis, in this first part we have canvassed insights from academics and
media artists from the United States, Europe and Latin America. In Chap. 1,
American academic and media literacy scholar, Paul Mihailidis, takes as his
starting point the term ‘infodemic’, coined in 2021 to describe the state of
misinformation about health and science that has the potential to undermine
public health initiatives and endanger lives. Mihailidis argues that the current
infodemic emerges in a digital culture that exacerbates three phenomena: dis-
tributed propaganda, the hollowing of local media ecosystems, and rampant
media cynicism. In his chapter, he uses these phenomena to introduce the
concept of “civic distance.” In his definition, civic distance reflects the increas-
ing space between our media lives and the human interactions necessary for
meaningful engagement in civic life. The comparison to the automobile is
made to reinforce the impacts of “distance” on how we interact with others.
Disordered contemporary information ecosystems provide the focus for US
media artist and writer Ivan Sigal’s chapter, which is presented as a transcript of
a keynote that he delivered on 31 March 2021 for the virtual, international
Media Education Summit, hosted by two universities in the UK: the University
of Leeds and the Centre for Excellence in Media Practice (CEMP) at
Bournemouth University. Sigal is Executive Director of Global Voices: a trans-
national, multilingual community of writers, translators and rights activists
who work to build understanding across borders. In this chapter he shares one
of their recent projects, designed to address disorder in information ecosys-
tems: Driven by mass media outlets with little allegiance to facts, and decontex-
tualised by social media platforms, he argues, we often turn to familiar narratives
to help make sense of the world. To understand how those narratives affect
what we know and how we learn, Global Voices has developed a research and
2 Democracy, Disruption and Civic Crisis (Diagnosis)

digital literacy method called the Civic Media Observatory. In his talk, Chap. 2,
Sigal describes how this approach can develop the contextual knowledge
required to understand, assess and respond to emerging events around
the world.
Prevailing disorder is often sourced back to the big tech giants, but their—
arguably tardy and merely palliative—self-regulatory response of blocking and
censoring content brings other problems in its train. The problem is diagnosed
in Chap. 3. Ursula Smartt is a law professor in the UK who asks whether plat-
forms such as Facebook and Twitter are breaching freedom of expression by
regulating and blocking content on their platforms and de-listing individuals
such as Donald Trump. She asks whether this amounts to self-regulatory cen-
sorship by the big US tech companies: Are they right to ban the promotion of
self-harm, suicide, bullying and incitement to racial hatred? In this chapter, the
Facebook Oversight Board is also assessed, the meaning of media plurality is
explored as well as the re-examination of fake news and disinformation on
social media platforms. Case law is presented, looking at the meaning of “pub-
lishers” in relation to ISPs and operators of websites in both US and UK law.
Legislative steps taken by the EU Commission as well as the UK government
in relation to “online harms and safety” end the discussion, leaving the unan-
swered questions whether it is possible to legislate the internet or whether it
should be left to the big social media tech giants to self-regulate content on
their platforms.
Social networks constituted young people’s information source of choice,
even before the pandemic. Chapter 4 takes us to Greece for an analysis of the
levels of civic engagement of teenagers, emerging from consecutive lockdowns,
that dramatically reduced their social spaces, making screens their main chan-
nels for communication and self-expression. In this chapter, Katerina
Chryssanthopoulou, a PhD researcher in Media and News Literacy based in
Athens, acknowledges the close connections between civic engagement, power
and information in her exploration of teen attitudes to social media and news.
Teenagers care about the world, she argues, and want to act to cure inequalities
and injustice, but usually function within family, school or online environ-
ments. With reduced social opportunities in the pandemic, the danger was
exacerbated that they were growing up, lacking suitable information struc-
tures, in a vacuum of meaningful content about how society is organised or
how to get involved. She asks whether today’s teens, as voters and decision
makers of tomorrow, are sufficiently empowered to get civically engaged? Can
they spontaneously become news literate or should they be educated to navi-
gate the ‘fake news’ environment, to sort truth from fiction?
The next two chapters focus on misinformation and disinformation in Latin
America: The first of these assesses the impact of disinformation on political
processes in Colombia in the 2016 plebiscite in a so-called post-conflict con-
text. Chapter 5 is authored by Colombian academics, Jesús Arroyave and
Martha Romero. After more than half a century of civil conflict, the saying that
“the first casualty of war is the truth” rings true, they assert, in a media
 Democracy, Disruption and Civic Crisis (Diagnosis) 3

ecosystem characterised by censorship, and control of information by the offi-

cial authorities, management of information that benefits the interests of the
economic groups that own many media outlets, and intimidation of journalists.
Thus, the path to peace is significantly hampered by the ways in which disinfor-
mation has seriously affected citizens’ ability to be well-informed. In this chap-
ter, Arroyave and Romero describe the challenging socio-political context
within which Colombian citizens function and make decisions, where disinfor-
mation is “a way of life.” They assess the role of disinformation in a particular
and important political moment—the plebiscite of 2016—through an analysis
of social media and the ways in which it was utilised to influence the public
vote. Through their research, in which twenty-eight accounts with a base of
761,017 tweets were analysed, they conclude that the old forms of propaganda
that were rife in Colombia throughout 50 years of conflict are still very much
alive in the digital era, evidenced by the number of citizens “led by the hand of
disinformation” to reject the peace process in 2016.
Mexican documentary-maker, researcher and media artist Pablo Martínez-­
Zárate turns to the archive to imagine alternative ways of engaging with civic
crisis. In Chap. 6 he proposes a critical methodological approach to misinfor-
mation and offers creative strategies to confront deviation or manipulation in
different moments of the communication process. This chapter draws on the
author’s experience as a documentary artist and combines theoretical and prac-
tical insights in the imagining of alternative models for understanding and nar-
rating historical events. Here, Martínez-Zárate uses his own films, installations
and interactive projects as examples of critical media making as a way of resist-
ing misinformation in partisan environments, such as Mexico, where tradi-
tional narrative strategies are blocked.

Reference
Stiegler, B. (2019). The age of disruption: Technology and madness in computational
capitalism. Wiley.
 CHAPTER 1

Civic Distance: Digital Culture’s Intrusion

on Trust, Engagement, and Belonging

Paul Mihailidis

The Insertion of Distance into Our Daily Lives: Cars

as Platforms

Around the world today, the automobile is ubiquitous. Roads built for the
automobile dominate our urban, suburban, and rural landscapes. The car, long
the enduring symbol of independence, flexibility, and autonomy, persists in
Western culture, and increasingly around the world. The evolution of the car
has led to vast development, and created dependence on fossil fuels and other
finite natural resources. The impacts of the automobile on society are complex
and well documented. The car has played a central role in the evolution of
society and contemporary life. Amongst the largest impacts of cars on society,
it has contributed to one constant that now pervades communities and societ-
ies: distance.
Distance, here, takes on a dual meaning. In one sense, distance refers to the
physical expansion of our lived space. As cars improve, they are able to take us
further to facilitate our daily lives, expanding the places we can reach. In
another sense, they create distance within and around our communities, as we
rely less on our immediate surroundings to meet our needs and engage with
those directly around us. We are able to move beyond our immediate

P. Mihailidis (*)
School of Communication, Emerson College, Boston, MA, USA
Emerson Engagement Lab, Boston, MA, USA
Salzburg Academy on Media and Global Change, Washington, DC, USA
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 5

Switzerland AG 2023
K. Fowler-Watt, J. McDougall (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Media
Misinformation, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-11976-7_1
6 P. MIHAILIDIS

communities to shop, to facilitate activities, and to work. As a result, we lessen

our reliance on our communities to facilitate daily life.
As populations grow, the number of automobiles and drivers has increased.
This means more people on the roads, more traffic, and more people in close
proximity to one another, separated by the structure of the car. As more cars
crowd more roads, they place pressure on infrastructures to support them
(roads, tolls, fuel, etc.), and require more resources to ensure proper regula-
tions (policies, government agencies, police and highway departments) to
ensure that society is bound to a common set of rules for safety.
These requirements for cars are tenuous. They rely on resources from peo-
ple in the form of taxes, parking meters, and tolls. They also require the will-
ingness of people to obey driving rules, to engage in the transaction costs
associated with a public good, and to look out for their fellow drivers. There is
an official set of laws, and policing to oversee that such laws are upheld, how-
ever uneven and inequitable that oversight may be. There is also a large unof-
ficial social contract that drivers must adhere to, to ensure that the systems in
place work. From merging and switching lanes, to entering into traffic, we
consistently negotiate with others in real time, where we both assert our move-
ments and help facilitate movement for others. And we do so while we are
distant from others, unable to communicate, and forced to make assumptions
about the intentions, rationale, and behaviour of other drivers.
In our cars we are often alone, and captive. We see others, protected by glass
and metal, near us physically perhaps, but distant in every other way. We depend
on each other to act civilly in cars. To not only obey the “rules of the road,”
but to also treat other drivers with civility and care. But we do so without
engaging with the other, and without the necessary “rigors of human commu-
nication” (Bugeja, 2017) that are crucial to understand how others are
approaching these shared public spaces. We rarely, if ever, know who the other
driver is, or what their situation is on any given day. We must assume they are
rational actors, within the same set of constraints as we have while driving.
Cars, however, are not places for engagement or dialogue. Because of the
speed of the car, the real-time decision making, and the general lack of account-
ability for our actions—few drivers are actually punished for disobeying laws or
skirting general rules of the road—we rush to judgment, we make assumptions
about motivations, and we are often angered, however fleeting, by fellow driv-
ers. Think about when a driver makes an illegal turn. Think about when they
aggressively merge. Or in traffic when drivers refuse to let others into a lane.
This causes frustration, anger, and in some cases, rage. We don’t know if the
other actor is intentional, or if they are under other pressures that are hurting
their judgment. We simply believe they are acting badly. When we are pedestri-
ans, walking or running, we generally feel the same towards drivers: they are
acting maliciously, or intentionally unhelpful. We don’t have the affordance to
stop and engage with them. We don’t have the ability to understand their back-
grounds, or to understand if they are acting badly on purpose, or if another
 1 CIVIC DISTANCE: DIGITAL CULTURE’S INTRUSION ON TRUST, ENGAGEMENT… 7

reason motivates them. The distance created by the metal and glass that encases
us in cars forces us into judgments, for better or worse, about those around us.
People don’t engage in rigorous human dialogue as we facilitate our daily
lives. But we often use cues and human signals to negotiate, passing others on
sidewalks, or in the supermarket. We have the opportunity to apologise, to
physically signal to others, and to ignore or adjust to certain scenarios where
negotiations are needed. In cars, these cues are largely unavailable. In cars, we
are bound to a set of rules and regulations that allow us to assume a semblance
of order and safety. In cars, distance has been normalised in our lives.
The automobile is a metaphor for our mediated lives today. Cars are like
platforms. They offer the chance to feel engagement, to connect amongst a sea
of others, without the real-time rigour of human connection. Mobile technolo-
gies and social media platforms are so embedded in our daily lives they now
occupy the majority of daily information and communication routines, and
have impacts on how we see the world (Mitchell et al., 2020), and on how we
process information, understand our world, and engage with those around us
(Pew Research Center, 2021). Just like cars, media platforms expand our
worlds. They provide us with more access to the world through ubiquitous
information flow, the ability to connect across distances, and to have more
information readily available to us than ever before. They increase the possibil-
ity space for new knowledge, expand our ability to advocate for causes, support
initiatives, and exchange information around issues that we care about
(Weinberger, 2019). They expand our knowledge production, from how much
we write, listen to stories, express ourselves, and engage with the vast informa-
tion architecture (Thompson, 2013).
Social media, like automobiles, expand our surroundings, and offer the pos-
sibility of a bigger world around us. But they also evoke distance. Distance that
poses grave risks to the social fabric that makes up our communities, our pub-
lics, and our democracies.

Social Media, Platforms, and Distance

In his book Reset, Ronald Deibert (2020) highlights the shift from a time when
social media was seen as “a way to bring people closer together and revitalize
democracy” (p. 5), to their perception as a sort of “social sickness.” Writes
Deibert:

A growing number of people believe that social media have a disproportionate

influence over important social and political decisions. Others are beginning to
notice that we are spending an unhealthy amount of our lives staring at our
devices, “socializing,” while in reality we are living in isolation and detached from
nature. (p. 5)

We often oscillate between seeing the opportunities that our new techno-
logical realities provide for connections, while lamenting their encroachment
8 P. MIHAILIDIS

into our lives and the tactics they use to create dependence. The increasing
commodification of our social media spaces, combined with a lack of regula-
tory oversight, has created a whirlwind of information disseminated at faster
and faster speeds, with the intention of driving users to engage often, deeper,
and with less control (Wu, 2016).
Like automobiles, “digital technologies have so deeply embedded them-
selves into everything we do,” writes Deibert (2020), “it is unrealistic to expect
that we can turn the clock back entirely” (265). Unlike cars, however, in our
digital spaces there are little to no regulations that limit, for example how fast
we can drive, the efficiency standards necessary for cars to exist, or the policies
that limit how many cars we can have on roads at any given time. In the United
States in particular, very few regulations exist around the extent to which our
main information platforms can share information, and with little regard to the
civic or environmental impact of such messaging. The more time we spend in
these unregulated information ecosystems, the more distance grows between
us and our physical surroundings. And the more we are immersed in spaces
that design to usurp our attention (Marantz, 2019), to engage in manipulative
and inequitable information dissemination (Noble, 2018), and to maximise the
extraction of data from users to maximise profits (O’Neil 2016).
One of the largest impacts of these platformed norms is on what media
scholar Douglas Rushkoff (2020) calls an “anti-human agenda” which is
“embedded in our technology, our markets, and our major cultural institu-
tions, from education and religion to civics and media. [this anti-human
agenda] has turned them from forces for human connection and expression
into ones of isolation and repression” (3). This anti-human agenda, Rushkoff
argues in his book Team Human (2020), emerges with intentionality amongst
the vast array of communication technologies that are now at the centre of our
daily lives:

We live in a bounty of communication technologies at our disposal. Our culture

is composed more of mediated experiences than of directly lived ones. Yet we are
also more alone and atomized than ever before. Our most advanced technologies
are not enhancing our connectivity, but thwarting it. They are replacing and
devaluing our humanity, and—in many different ways—undermining our respect
for one another and ourselves. (p. 5)

Rushkoff argues that our dependence on technologies has intervened in the

human values we need to trust in one another, and in our institutions that sup-
port inclusive and robust communities. “Values,” Rushkoff (2020) writes,
“once gave human society meaning and direction. Now this function is fulfilled
by data, and our great ideals are reduced to memes” (211). The values that
Rushkoff reflects upon—“love, connection, justice, distributed prosperity”
(211)—have been reduced in their complexity by snippets of mediated texts
that reduce and distort their place in our lives, while idealising it in others.
 1 CIVIC DISTANCE: DIGITAL CULTURE’S INTRUSION ON TRUST, ENGAGEMENT… 9

Turkle (2016), exploring the loss of connection that our technologies cre-
ate, references studies that find markers for empathy in young people to be in
decline, and connects to their increasing time spent in digital ecosystems. Like
the automobile, social platforms shield us, with smaller sized metal and glass,
from those around us. They offer us compelling reasons to forgo the efforts of
human engagement, for distracting tidbits of information that we return to
again and again to fill the voids that we feel. In her visual treatment on loneli-
ness, Radtke (2021) reminds us that with every new technological evolution,
we “harken back” towards some more idyllic past. “By now it’s clear that waves
of cultural nostalgia are so often geared towards reclaiming what never quite
existed,” argues Radtke (2021, 202). Radtke, however, does believe that the
sheer ubiquity of media in our lives, and its ability to distort our self-identities,
creates new challenges for how we exist in the world alongside others. We may
have always been a lonely people, but Radtke now sees little time to process
that loneliness, and embrace it.
Where distance exists, trust wanes. Research has shown declining trust in
our media and public institutions for some time now (Brenan, 2021), and
while new research shows that echo chambers and filter bubbles may not be as
prevalent as assumed (Arguedas et al., 2022), what’s clear is that our digital
ecosystems allow for the insertion of disinformation and misinformation that
cast doubt on our ability to trust, connect, and be together in the world. Like
cars passing each other on highways, messages on social media pass us at
increasingly fast speeds, forcing us to make assumptions, to react without
thinking, and to make decisions in information vacuums. This reality, com-
bined with the intentional design of platforms to prioritise that which receives
the most attention, offers a landscape for misinformation and disinformation to
spread and sustain itself online. One recent case where, around the globe, the
spread of misinformation is having significant impacts on public health, com-
munity health, and civic life: the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Covid-19 Infodemic

Consider the Covid-19 pandemic and the proliferation of misinformation
around the world. As the Covid-19 virus spread, causing significant death, and
placing extreme pressure on public hospitals and local and national govern-
ments around the world, it also exacerbated the spread of misinformation with
grave consequences for societies around the world. The spread of misinforma-
tion has become so prevalent that the World Health Organization attached the
term “infodemic” to explain the “false or misleading information in digital and
physical environments during a disease outbreak” (WHO, n.d., Para 1).
The Covid-19 pandemic was a health emergency first and foremost, but the
sheer amount of misinformation shared online sowed confusion among many,
and supported “mistrust in health authorities and undermines the public health
response” (WHO, n.d., Para 1). A recent study by the Kaiser Family Foundation
found that, in the United States, 60% of the population believe that public
10 P. MIHAILIDIS

institutions are exaggerating and falsifying information about the pandemic

(KFF, 2021). Across a range of statements supporting Covid-19 misinforma-
tion, the survey found that approximately 30–50% believed false information to
be true. These numbers increased with those who self-reported as unvacci-
nated, and with those that spent more time on social platforms and with hyper-­
partisan news outlets (KFF, 2021). This data reinforces research that shows
people are sceptical of large organisations in general, and advances in science
have a history of inequity connected to them, making underrepresented popu-
lations sceptical of science-based mandates.
Of course, the public should not be held responsible for the sustained spread
and proliferation of misinformation around the Covid-19 vaccine. Media com-
panies routinely lament the spread of false information through their platforms,
but as Donovan (2020a, 2020b) writes, “The pandemic lays bare how tech
companies’ reluctance to act recursively worsens our world. In times of uncer-
tainty, the vicious cycle is more potent than ever. Scientific debates that are
typically confined to a small community of experts become fodder for mounte-
banks of all kinds” (Donovan, 2020b, Para 2). That platforms take little initia-
tive to quell the spread of misinformation creates an environment where we ask
people to take the responsibility to navigate these information ecosystems,
which are increasingly complex, lack algorithmic transparency, and function as
private entities in public arenas. The implication of this reality is one in which
“many governments and health authorities are doing everything in their con-
trol, but real-time crisis communications in an age of digital platforms has
become a lethal challenge” (Donovan & Wardle, 2020, para 3).
The Covid-19 pandemic and the parallel infodemic that has emerged expose
the very real dangers of our digital culture to social, civic, and physical well-­
being. The problem lies not in the tools themselves, as they have brought
much opportunity to the world to connect and collaborate. The implications
of the infodemic have taught us that digital platforms often give space to the
loudest voices, perhaps not the majority voices, but those with the savvy to
extract and manipulate platform principles for their ends. This creates a sce-
nario where users must navigate information ecosystems that blend truth and
falsehoods, fact and hearsay, with few boundaries and with fleeting opportuni-
ties for deep engagement. And with lacking regulation, the onus of responsibil-
ity falls to the user, which is an unrealistic burden to place. Write Donovan and
Wardle (2020) “society cannot shoulder the burden wrought by rampant med-
ical misinformation, scams, and hoaxes” (para 4).
Our ability to engage meaningfully with credible information in digital cul-
ture continues to present challenges, and opportunities. In Reset, Deibert
(2020) offers an approach to meaningful engagement in digital culture around
three core approaches: retreat, reform, restraint. These approaches combine
individual behaviours towards time online, policy reform, and designing of
technologies with restraints geared towards supporting a common good. These
approaches take time, effort, and will. The Covid-19 pandemic shows that more
information may not necessarily lead to more enlightened social structures.
 1 CIVIC DISTANCE: DIGITAL CULTURE’S INTRUSION ON TRUST, ENGAGEMENT… 11

In his book, New Dark Age, James Bridle (2018) interrogates the idea that
supported the enlightenment period: “more knowledge—more information—
leads to better decisions” (p. 10). Instead, Bridle (2018) articulates what he
calls a “darkness” that has enveloped our society in the digital age:

As so we find ourselves today connected to vast repositories of knowledge, and

yet we have not learned to think. In fact, the opposite is true: that which was
intended to enlighten the world in practice darkens it. The abundance of infor-
mation and the plurality of worldviews now accessible to us through the internet
are not producing a coherent consensus reality, but one driven by fundamentalist
insistence on simplistic narratives, conspiracy theories, and post-factual poli-
tics. (10–11).

The challenges, then, perhaps lay not in the reform of our media systems,
which will never match the pace of technological innovation, but rather how we
choose to understand the ways in which we engage in the world with others, and
how we combat the distance that our technologies have placed in between us
and those around us. The factionalisation of media and information, in the case
of the Covid-19 infodemic, creates significant risk for our collective well-being.
Donovan and Wardle (2020) note, “Some of the most engaging disinformation
efforts tap into people’s deepest fears about their own safety and that of their
loved ones. That’s in part why the Covid-19 pandemic features the latest swarm
of bad and misinformed actors pushing dangerous narratives” (Para. 9).

Civic Belonging in a Culture of Distance

The implications of civic distance are vast. On the one hand, they create detach-
ment from our public institutions, like schools and local governments. On the
other hand, they create detachment from those people and places around us,
neighbours, environments, and community spaces. How we negotiate these dis-
tances will dictate the future of our digital culture and its place in daily life.
Bridle (2018) acknowledges the human element in this digital time: “how we
understand and think about our place in the world, and our relation to one
another and to machines, will ultimately decide if madness or peace is where our
technologies will take us” (11). This dichotomy may feel extreme, but it allows
us to think about the future of our communities, and the ways in which we cre-
ated belonging, within and beyond the technologies that facilitate our lives.
With automobiles, we see a recent shift to create regulations and incentives
that help the environment. Electric vehicles lessen the burden on fossil fuels,
new driverless cars hope to reduce human accidents, and technological innova-
tions have improved safety features and alert features for drivers. There is the
will to both regulate and innovate for more responsible automobile use. At the
same time, there’s a push to build better and more robust public infrastructures
for transportation, for living in communal spaces, and for lessening the burden
on the car. More flexible working environments may lead to less reliance on
12 P. MIHAILIDIS

automobiles and more time in our local communities, where work and life bal-
ances can be improved.
In our digital culture, we will need to explore what incentives and regula-
tions are needed to focus to reclaim our media for more equitable and robust
civil societies. A renewed focus on community, and how that relates to a human
agenda, how Rushkoff sees a renewed commitment to belonging in our medi-
ated world. “Our personal contributions,” writes Rushkoff, “have greater
effect when they are amplified by a network of peers working in solidarity”
(p. 213). Contributions, amplified by networks, occur frequently in digital cul-
ture. This type of transactional support is beneficial. Online, however, it’s often
designed with groups who think alike and act alike, with little engagement
across ideas, and across differences. A human agenda allows us to be in the
presence of others, connected and engaged. The physical proximity of our
communities creates meaning, value, and purpose. In our mediated spaces, we
imagine such meaning, but it is easily distorted amongst the lack of human
engagement and the abundance of information that we are asked to navigate.
Raghuram Rajan, writing in The Third Pillar, (2019) sees reinvigorated physi-
cal communities as a path to more robust and inclusive belonging:

When members are in close proximity and work together for the community, they
build a stronger community. As people run into one another, as they have to work
with one another for local projects, social capital—as embodied in mutual under-
standing, empathy, and reservoirs of goodwill—accumulates. (p. 328)

To build a sense of belonging, we will need to build a human-centred

approach to our digital culture. Efforts to educate the public about media and
technology must be done within community- and human-based contexts.
Focusing on the platforms or technologies themselves will push us further into
a reality of distance from others, and not meaningful connections with others.
This does not mean that we should turn away from the technologies that pro-
vide us with convenience and connection. Rather, we should work to create
spaces of solitude, and community, that are focused on our distinctly human
values, and allow media to support such spaces, and not be those spaces.
In an 1857 essay titled Solitude and Sympathy, Ralph Waldo Emerson reflects
on the need to be present in the world, in solitude and solidarity, to truly
embrace our surroundings:

Society and solitude are deceptive names. It is not the circumstance of seeing
more or fewer people, but the readiness of sympathy, that imports; and a sound
mind will derive its principles from insight, with ever a purer ascent to the
­sufficient and absolute right, and will accept society as the natural element in
which they are to be applied. (Para 16)

In our present digital culture, in which distance pervades our digital lives,
we must see our belonging as necessarily human first, and technological
thereafter.
 1 CIVIC DISTANCE: DIGITAL CULTURE’S INTRUSION ON TRUST, ENGAGEMENT… 13

References
Arguedas, A. R., Robertson, C. T., Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2022, January 19).
Echo chambers, filter bubbles, and polarisation: A literature review. Reuters Institute
for the Study of Journalism. Retrieved January 2022, from https://reutersinstitute.
politics.ox.ac.uk/echo-­chambers-­filter-­bubbles-­and-­polarisation-­literature-­review
Brenan, K. (2021, October). Americans’ trust in media dips to second lowest on record.
Gallup. Retrieved March 2022, from https://news.gallup.com/poll/355526/
americans-­trust-­media-­dips-­second-­lowest-­record.aspx
Bridle, J. (2018). New dark age: Technology and the end of the future. Verso Books.
Bugeja, M. J. (2017). Interpersonal divide in the age of the machine (2nd ed.). Oxford
University Press.
Deibert, R. J. (2020). Reset: Reclaiming the internet for civil society. House of Anansi.
Donovan, J. (2020a, March 17). Here’s how social media can combat the coronavirus
‘infodemic’. MIT Technology Review. Retrieved November 2021, from https://
www.technologyreview.com/2020/03/17/905279/facebook-­twitter-­social-­media-
­infodemic-­misinformation/
Donovan, J. (2020b, April 14). Social-media companies must flatten the curve of mis-
information. Nature. Retrieved March 2022, from https://www.nature.com/arti-
cles/d41586-­020-­01107-­z
Donovan, J., & Wardle, C. (2020, August 6). Misinformation is everybody’s problem
now. Insights from the social sciences. Retrieved December 2021, from https://
i t e m s . s s r c . o r g / c o v i d -­1 9 -­a n d -­t h e -­s o c i a l -­s c i e n c e s / m e d i a t e d -­c r i s i s /
misinformation-­is-­everybodys-­problem-­now/
Emerson, R. W. (1857, December). Solitude and society. The Atlantic. Retrieved
February 2022, from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1857/12/
solitude-­and-­society/376145/
Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF). (2021). COVID-19 vaccine monitor: Media and mis-
information. Retrieved March 2022, from https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-­
covid-­1 9/press-­r elease/covid-­1 9-­m isinformation-­i s-­u biquitous-­7 8-­o f-­t he-­
public-­believes-­or-­is-­unsure-­about-­at-­least-­one-­false-­statement-­and-­nearly-­at-­third-­
believe-­at-­least-­four-­of-­eight-­false-­statements-­tested/
Marantz, A. (2019). Antisocial: Online extremists, techno-utopians, and the hijacking of
the American conversation. Viking.
Mitchell, A., Jurkowitz, M., Oliphant, J. B., & Shearer, E. (2020, July 30). Americans
who mainly get their news on social media are less engaged, less knowledgeable. Pew
Research Center. Retrieved January 2022, from http://www.journalism.
org/2020/07/30/americans-­who-­mainly-­get-­their-­news-­on-­social-­media-­are-
­less-­engaged-­less-­knowledgeable
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression. New York University Press.
O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and
threatens democracy. Broadway Books.
Pew Research Center. (2021, April). Social media use in 2021. Retrieved February
2022, from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/04/07/social-­media-­
use-­in-­2021/
Radtke, K. (2021). Seek you: A journey through American loneliness. Pantheon.
Rajan, R. (2019). The third pillar: How markets and the state leave the community
behind. Penguin.
Rushkoff, D. (2020). Team human. Ledizioni.
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
the flowers in May, Mr. Laird—and there's a fireplace in your room in the
attic. I may be wrong, but it's always seemed to me if a fellow's got a
welcome and an open fire, the attic's just as good as the parlour."

Mr. Laird looked delighted. "I'm in love with it already," he responded

gleefully; "I wouldn't trade it for any room in the house. I couldn't imagine,"
he went on mirthfully, "what was coming. I thought it must be the dog-
kennel, or a dark closet, or a wood-shed; but an attic—and a fireplace! Why,
bless my heart, there's nothing in the world I love like an attic—secluded,
lofty, roomy—it's the best place in the house. Let us see it now."

"Where's Moses?" said my uncle; "he'll take your valise up for you. It's
plain, but it's comfortable, Mr. Laird. And if you like it, there's just one way
I want you to show it."

"And what might that be?" asked our visitor.

"Don't be in any hurry about leaving," said my uncle with serious air.

"No, we'll think you don't like it if you are," chimed in my aunt.

"Where's Moses?" asked uncle again.

"I don't know where Moses is," said the Reverend Gordon Laird, his face
as sober as a judge, "but one thing I do know—I've heard of Southern
hospitality, and the half was never told."

Uncle bowed; Aunt Agnes smiled graciously. As for me, I had

disappeared.

"What have you been up to now? You certainly did get out of the way in
a hurry—you've been up to the attic yourself, haven't you, now?" for
mother saw that I was flurried and out of breath when I returned.

It was a little while before I owned up. But I reckoned they'd find out
sooner or later anyhow. "Well," I said at last, "yes, if you will know. I ran up
and put my silver toilet set on the dresser—it helped ever so much to make
things look decent. And I took up those roses from the library—they make
the whole room look different."

"Those roses!" my mother echoed; "why, child, Mr. Giddens sent you
those roses just this morning—they're American beauties, Helen."

"I know it," I answered calmly, "so they'll be something new—to him.
Besides, there's some respect due a clergyman from Edinburgh."

VI

THE GLINT OF THE HEATHER

Charlie dropped in for supper that evening. I don't remember whether or

not he was specially invited and it doesn't matter. He came while everybody
except myself was in the last stages of preparation for the evening meal; I
was in the hall as he came in.

The first thing that caught his eye—after me—was the clerical hat that
hung between two of uncle's broad-rimmed grays. He put it on and made
very merry over it. It was decidedly too large for him too; as soon as he
noticed that, he tipped it jauntily to the back of his head—even then it
looked big. The Reverend Gordon's attic was certainly the best room in his
bodily edifice.

"Your elder didn't turn up?" said Charlie.

"No, he didn't come."

"And you got the clergyman?"

I nodded.
 "Up-stairs right now?"

"Yes."

"In the attic?"

"That's where he is."

Charlie returned the hat to its peg. Then he took off his overcoat,
disclosing a faultless evening dress, for the theatre was our objective point
that night.

"What kind of a cove is this parson?" he enquired carelessly.

"He's about your age," said I.

"Nice?"

"Uncle thinks so," I answered cautiously.

"How does your mother like him—has she looked him over?"

"I really don't know—he's only been here an hour or two. You certainly
do look nice to-night, Charlie."

"How long is this cleric going to stay?" he pursued.

"I don't know. I heard uncle telling him to stay as long as he could."

"What denomination is he?"

"Belongs to the true church," said I.

"I thought Mr. Furvell said he was Presbyterian."

"So he is—he's from Edinburgh. And he's vastly interested in the

darkies. They don't grow 'em over there, it seems. He got on pretty thin ice
with uncle—they were talking the nigger problem."
 "They must have been hard up for conversation," said Mr. Giddens, with
a little curl of the lip.

"But they weren't," I protested; "he's a splendid talker—hush, there he's

coming now," as I heard a footfall on the stair. "Come and meet him."

I introduced the two men to each other. They stood talking a little in the
hall—and I watched them while I listened. Charlie was in full dress, as I
have said, with diamond accompaniment; Mr. Laird was in his clericals.
They stood close together, chatting very pleasantly; I thought I had never
seen two finer types of men, both strong and straight and tall—though
Charlie wasn't quite so tall. The Southerner had the keenest face, I thought,
bright and animated, with eager, penetrating eyes, and his whole bearing
was that of a high-minded and successful man of the world. They were
discussing "futures" at the time, I think, suggested doubtless by preliminary
remarks about the weather and the prospect of the cotton crop. I know I was
surprised to observe that the Reverend Gordon Laird was by no means
ignorant of the subject; strange subject, too, when you come to think of it—
futures, which comprise a great deal more than cotton!

Perhaps Charlie had the keener face, as I have said, but there was more
of insight in Mr. Laird's. His were the more wistful eyes, as if they were
looking for something not to be found on the surface. And really, of the two,
the Scotchman seemed to be doing the most of the inspecting; I mean, by
that, that Charlie didn't appear to have the slightest chance to patronize him,
as business men are so apt to do with clergymen. For the minister, his
clerical coat and collar to the contrary notwithstanding, impressed one as
having a certain order of business that was just as important as the other's;
and he seemed to pride himself on it, too, in a reserved sort of way. In fact, I
should hardly say this at all, since I don't know exactly how I could defend
it—but there was an undefinable something about him that made one feel
Mr. Laird reckoned his work quite as necessary to the world's good as that
of any prosperous business man, even of a wealthy ship-owner from
Savannah.

"Have you been long in our country, sir?" Mr. Giddens took advantage of
the first pause to enquire.
 "No," said the other. "I'm quite a tenderfoot—it's only two weeks since I
landed at New York. I came straight South to see Dr. Paine; he took a post-
graduate session in Edinburgh, and I met him there. We scraped up quite a
friendship—and that's how I came to visit him."

"Do you sail from New York, returning, Mr. Laird?" I ventured, thinking
I ought to bear some part in the conversation.

"That's all very uncertain," he answered thoughtfully; "I've been in

communication with the Colonial Committee; and it's just possible I may
take work in Canada. They're sorely in need of men there, it seems."

"It's a wonderful country," pronounced Charlie; "I spent a week once

between Montreal and Quebec. There's untold wealth in Canada, if it were
only exploited."

"That's what I have heard," said Mr. Laird; "and I'd like to lend a hand,"
he added quietly, the earnestness of his eyes interpreting his words. But
Charlie evidently did not understand him.

"You mean in the way of investment, sir?"

"Yes," said the Reverend Gordon Laird; "yes, I guess that's it—yes,
investment."

This somewhat enigmatical conversation was terminated by the advent

of the other members of the family, all quite ready for the supper that was
waiting. And a decidedly animated circle it was that surrounded our well-
laden board. Uncle was in fine spirits, as he ever was when he had
congenial company, and the honours of his attention were pretty evenly
divided between the Scotchman and the Southerner.

It was delightful to watch the interest and surprise of our clerical guest,
so new and different did everything appear to him. For our dear Southland
has fashions all its own, each one of them more delicious than another.
Perhaps this is especially true of what we eat, and of how we go about it.
We had a coloured boy with a long feather fan whose duty it was to guard
us from the flies. This amused him vastly; especially once when my aunt
motioned him to look—the dusky Washington was almost asleep, leaning
against the wall. And so many of our dishes seemed to strike the foreigner
as the newest and most palatable things on earth. We had the savoury rock
in little fish-shaped dishes—they looked all ready to swim—and sweet
potatoes and corn bread and fried chicken, and hot biscuits too, and a lot of
other things Scotchmen never see. It was lovely to watch Aunt Agnes' face,
brightening with every recurring exclamation of surprise or pleasure from
our visitor.

On the other hand he was hardly less interesting to us. A really new type
is something to which a little Southern town is seldom treated—we are so
fearfully native-born. And Gordon Laird (the Reverend can't be always
used) seemed to bring with him the flavour of the world without. His accent
was so different, as I have said; and many of his terms were so unfamiliar to
us. For instance, we soon remarked that he referred to the Episcopal church
as the Church of England; and once or twice he spoke of the "Kirk
Session," which had to be explained; and he rarely used the term "pastor,"
or "preacher," as we did—it was always "minister" with him. It was most
interesting, too, to hear him talk of Edinburgh, of its castle, its Holyrood, its
Princes Street, its Scott's monument, its haunts of Knox and memories of
Burns.

"Fo' de Lawd, Miss Helen, dat new preacher, he's got a heap o' learnin',"
Lyddie said one day, "an' he knows how to let it out, dat's sho'."

That very first night, that first supper, I mean, found us all listening with
great intentness to his description of much we had hardly ever heard of
before. I remember he spoke of higher criticism, giving the names of two or
three great Scottish scholars, and he seemed a little disappointed to find we
had never heard of the latter and but little more than heard of the former. He
spoke, it seemed to me, as if this higher criticism were a matter of great
importance, almost as if it were troubling his own soul—but this I did not
understand till long after.

The discussion ran so steadily along church lines that even Charlie, who
was not very strong on matters ecclesiastical, contributed a question.

"What church does your Queen belong to, Mr. Laird?" he asked.
 "To the Presbyterian," replied our guest, looking very candidly at the
questioner; "when she is in Scotland, that is."

"Oh," said Charlie, "I always thought she belonged to the State church."

"So she does," replied the other, "and that is the State church of
Scotland."

"Miss Helen thinks that's fine," broke in my uncle. "I'm sure her far-off
ancestors must have been Scotch Presbyterians, Mr. Laird. She's a regular
Puritan—in theory."

"Then you'll be going to the service at the opening of Presbytery to-

night, Miss Randall," said Mr. Laird, turning to me.

I was silent, not knowing just what to say. Yet I felt that uncle's statement
was quite just all the time. For, ever since a child, I had had a kind of
passionate devotion to the church of my fathers; yet it is only fair to add
that if there was one girl in all our town who would not have been called
religious, who would, in fact, have been called a gay society girl—what a
poor garish definition that seems to me now!—I was that very one.

"What her uncle says about Helen reminds me of something I must tell
you, Mr. Laird," began my mother, breaking the silence that had followed
his rather pointed question. "I always taught her the Shorter Catechism
when she was a little girl—made her learn it, at least—and one Sunday
afternoon I was following her around the yard trying to get her to answer
what is Sanctification; well, she suddenly turned to me, and what do you
think she said?"

"Couldn't imagine, I'm sure," answered Mr. Laird.

"'What's the use, mother,' she said, 'of teaching me all this—when
perhaps I won't marry a Presbyterian at all?'"

"All the more need of it then," replied our guest amid the laugh that
followed; "it won't be wasted anyhow, whoever the lucky man may be. It's
wonderful how that catechism stays with you, when once it gets in the
blood. I learned it on the hills of Scotland," he went on, his deep eyes
brightening as if the memory gave him joy, "and I hardly ever wander now
in wild or lonely regions without its great words coming back to me. They
go well together, I always think—they're both lofty."

"On the hills?" echoed Mr. Giddens, who had never lived outside the
city; "did your father send you there to learn it?—pretty hard lines, I should
say."

"Oh, no," Mr. Laird answered simply, "my work lay there. I used to take
care of sheep on the hills—I was a herd laddie, as they call them in
Scotland. My father is a shepherd."

I felt, rather than saw, the consternation that came on every face.

"What did you say about your father?" my uncle asked involuntarily,
looking up impulsively from his plate. Now, uncle was a gentleman, if ever
one was born, but this intimation fairly swept him off his feet. "You were
speaking about your father, were you not?" he amended, thinking the
question more delicate in this form.

"Yes," said Mr. Laird, evidently quite unconscious of having caused a

sensation. "I was saying my father is a shepherd. He takes care, along with
other herds, of the gentlemen's flocks in Scotland—in Midlothian. The
shepherd gets so many sheep for himself each year—that's part of his hire,
you see."

"Yes, yes, I see," rejoined my uncle. "Have some more of the ice-cream,
Mr. Laird. Washington, pass the ice-cream to the gentleman." It was funny,
had it not been so real, to see uncle's consternation. This was something
new to my patrician relative.

"Do let me help you to a little more of this chocolate cake," broke in my
aunt.

"And your coffee cup is empty," added my mother. Both showed the
sudden perturbation that had laid hold of uncle, for which the only outlet
was this sudden freshet of hospitality.
 "No, thank you," our guest answered quietly, "I've had quite enough—
you Southerners would soon kill a man with kindness. Yes," he went on,
resuming the interrupted theme, "the catechism goes well with the
shepherd's crook; if there's any one calling in the world that's been
productive of plain living and high thinking, it's the shepherd's."

"Half of that programme appeals to me," laughed Charlie Giddens,

helping himself generously to the chocolate cake. "I'm afraid I'd make a
poor shepherd." Charlie seemed unable to keep his eyes from Mr. Laird's
face; this candour of biography was quite beyond him.

"But it's a fact," our Scotch visitor went on quite earnestly; "it's
wonderful the difference there has been, as a class, between the shepherds
and the ploughmen, in Scotland. The shepherds have been so much
superior; their eyes were constantly lifted to the hills, you see, and the
others had to keep theirs on the ground. Besides, their work developed a
sense of responsibility—and it took a tender man to make a good shepherd.
Oh, yes, the shepherds of Scotland have been a noble race of men."

"And your father is still living in Scotland?" enquired my mother from

across the table.

"Yes," he answered; "yes, he's still living."

"That's a phase of life we haven't been privileged to see," my uncle

remarked, concluding quite a lengthy silence; "indeed, we haven't seen
anything of your Scottish life at all. I have often thought I'd love especially
to see Edinburgh."

"I'd sooner see the shepherds on the hills," cried I. "I'd love to see the
heather—and the mists rolling back over the mountains, like I've read about
in Scott."

"Have you never been to the old world, Miss Helen?" our guest enquired
of me.

"No, never," I replied; "I've never been from under the stars and stripes."
 "But she's contemplating a European trip, Mr. Laird," Mr. Giddens broke
in, looking very knowingly at me.

"Yes," chimed my mother, a playful smile lurking about her mouth,

"perhaps you'll meet over there before very long."

Mr. Laird turned and looked at me. I know my face betrayed me. But if
he put two and two together he didn't give us the result. "I hope you'll bring
your mother with you when you come," was all he said.

"But Mrs. Randall's a poor sailor," quoth Charlie Giddens.

"So am I," was my remark.

"Then you must choose a fair-weather season for your voyage," pressed
Charlie, maintaining an excellent gravity.

"But you can't always tell," said I. "Often the storms don't come till you
get out to sea."

VII

THE GLORY OF THEIR STRENGTH

We went to the theatre that night, Charlie and I, as we had arranged. But
one-half of us didn't enjoy it very much. The play was a light, frivolous
thing, and I so defined it to Charlie before the second act was through.

"I thought you liked the gay and festive sort," he said; "I do believe this
preachers' convocation is having a depressing influence on you," which
remark I resented not a little; whatever my weaknesses were, I knew
susceptibility to the clergy was not one of them.
 "Nothing of the sort," I retorted; "but the thing isn't true to life—life was
never one long cackle like that. Besides, they haven't any fire on, and it's
cold—and I'm going home after the next act."

Which I did, sure enough, and took Charlie with me. Our seats were near
the front; and I must confess I did enjoy our procession down the aisle. I
could see the looks of admiration on every hand—of envy, too, from some
maidenly and matronly eyes.

Charlie was so tall and straight and handsome, and had such an original
head of hair. Besides, most of our townspeople knew he was an aristocrat—
our little city made a specialty of aristocracy—and absolutely all of them
knew that he was rich. The darkies had a good deal to do with this, I fancy.
My admirer had come from far away, from a city, too, and all the sons of
Ham invest the stranger from a distance with the glory of wealth untold.
But white folks aren't so very different after all; it's a very odd sort of girl
that doesn't take some satisfaction out of these far-travelled pilgrims that
come hundreds of miles, and stay several days at the best hotel, just to
worship at her feet. A local sweetheart is all very well in his way—but the
whole town doesn't know when he comes. Besides, it's so convenient for the
local to pay his homage that it may mean very much or very little. But when
a lover comes across a couple of states, leaving behind him a big city—and
all the girls that are sorry to see him go, that's the best of it—that is
something else, as we used to say in the South. It means his temperature
must be about a hundred and twenty in the shade, as I have heard Uncle
Henry say many a time.

Yes, I was proud enough of Charlie as we walked the full length of the
theatre that night, he keeping close behind and carrying my white opera
cloak on his arm. I remember an old maid—and they are the best authority
on such matters—telling me that Charlie had a very caressing way of
carrying a cloak, as if it were a sacred thing. I have thought quite a little
over this, and I believe there's something in it.

I cannot say I was sorry when I heard voices in the library as we came in
the house. And that's a bad sign when a girl's in love. There should be no
such music to a love-lorn pair as dead silence in the library when they come
home through the dark. When the poet sang of voices of the night I'm sure
he meant just two.

The Presbytery meeting was evidently over, for they were all home, Mr.
Furvell among them. Now I should have said at the outset that Mr. Furvell,
although he was our pastor and much beloved at that, was really quite a
Puritan of a man. And I was sure, as soon as he shook hands with me that
night, that he was concerned about my soul.

"Did you enjoy the play, Miss Helen?" he said, looking as solemnly at
me as though I had spent the evening where Dives was when he asked for a
drop of water to cool his tongue.

"No," said I, "it was a fool play," whereat Mr. Furvell looked a little
comforted.

"We had a beautiful service at the Presbytery," he went on, his solemnity
but little diluted; "the Lord was with us, Miss Helen," with an intonation
that implied a monopoly. "You'd have been more profited if you had been
there. Don't you think so, Mr. Laird?"

I fancy none of us learned much from our visitor's reply. Whatever it

was, it was quite evasive; but I remember that he looked at me instead of
his questioner—and I felt a little rising anger that my own minister should
have put me in this light before a stranger. He would have found out what a
frivolous heathen I was quite soon enough, I thought, without any
assistance of this kind from Mr. Furvell. The conversation seemed to flag a
little after this, and it wasn't very long till Charlie and I slipped off into the
library. I didn't slip as cheerfully as Charlie. And he hadn't got more than
well begun upon a general criticism of Mr. Laird before uncle knocked at
the door—uncle was a very cautious man—"We're going to have prayers;
will you and Mr. Giddens come in to worship?"

Charlie gave a little gasp. "We're at our devotions right now ourselves,"
he said, so low that uncle could not hear. Then we had a swift little debate. I
was for prayers, and Charlie said he believed they had brought that whole
Presbytery together just to convert me. Which, I retorted, would be like
training all the guns of the American navy on one little house fly.
 Anyhow, we went in—even Charlie couldn't have done anything else—
and the Reverend Gordon Laird had the Bible in his hand.

"Do you sing?" he suddenly enquired, looking up from the book.

"Who?" asked my Aunt Agnes, quite amazed.

"Oh! I mean, do you have singing at family worship? It's a very common
custom in Scotland—they usually go together."

Of course we had never heard of such a thing. In fact, family worship in

any form was one of the dainties we kept for visitors—if they were able to
help themselves.

So Mr. Laird spoke a few words about their Scottish Psalmody—I had
never heard the term before—and he said there were no hymns to touch
them, for strength and grandeur. I consider this epoch-making, in a certain
sense; for the psalms of David have been the songs in the house of my
pilgrimage for long years now.

Suddenly uncle asked him to sing one for us. He seemed quite willing,
and we all listened eagerly; except Charlie, who thought, I fancied, that it
was a waste of precious time.

I love to sit and think again of that wonderful experience. Uncle was
there, and my Aunt Agnes, and my precious mother; my promised husband,
too, was of the little company. I can see again the look of expectation,
surprise, and almost wonder as the young minister, with serious mien, sang
us one of the psalms of his native land. He chose the eighty-ninth—I know
them nearly all by number now. Our visitor's voice was not so cultured as
some I have heard, but it was clear and sweet, and his ear was true,—and,
best of all, his whole soul seemed to be in the great words as they rose
slowly from his lips. The words are so noble that I must write them out.

"Oh! greatly blessed the people are

The joyful sound that know—
In brightness of Thy face, oh, Lord,
They ever on shall go.
 "They in Thy name shall all the day
Rejoice exceedingly
And in Thy righteousness shall they
Exalted be on high."

So ran the mighty song. But I think we felt the grandeur of it most when he
sang the next two lines:

"Because the glory of their strength

Doth only stand in Thee,"

which impressed me then, and still impresses me, as the most majestic
union of words I ever heard in any form of religious song.

"That's wonderful!" said my mother as the psalm was finished.

"Beautiful!" contributed my uncle; "sounds like it ought to be sung by a

race of giants."

"So it was," said Mr. Laird. "The martyrs have sung those words—
hundreds of them. That psalm was a favourite with the Covenanters."

"The what?" interjected Mr. Giddens. "The Covenanters, did you say?
Who were they?"

"The Covenanters," replied Mr. Laird. "And I consider that's the greatest
name ever given to a band of men."

"Were they a religious sect?" asked Charlie.

"No, sir—they were a religious army," answered Mr. Laird. "And I've
got their blood in my veins. Some of my ancestors laid down their lives for
their faith—and this world never saw an aristocracy like to them." His
cheeks were flushed, his whole face animated with a wonderful light—and
he looked really beautiful. Never shall I forget the expression on the faces
round me; they didn't know what to make of this so unfamiliar kind of man.

But Charlie was not through with the subject yet. "Well, that kind of
thing may have suited them," he began again, "and there certainly is a kind
of strength about it. But I don't like it as well as our church hymns," he
continued, smiling.

"I didn't think you would," replied the minister, not smiling at all.

Then Mr. Laird took the Bible and went on with worship. He first read a
bit from the Scriptures, though what part it was I cannot remember. After
that he prayed. A beautiful, simple prayer—I thought it was so manly,
though that's a strange word to apply to a prayer. But he never did think, as
I came to know well enough later on, that God cares to have us abase
ourselves just for the sake of doing so. Strangely enough, the only one thing
I definitely remember about his prayer is that he said: "Give us a good
night's rest," and it struck me as a beautifully simple petition.

There is one feature of that evening's worship that lingers with me very
vividly. After we knelt down—his chair was a few feet from mine—Charlie
crept over to the sofa where I was kneeling and bowed down beside me. It
thrilled me so—perhaps not in terms of Charlie Giddens exactly—but it was
the first time I ever thought of love and prayer going together. And I recall
how overpoweringly it came to me that there could, surely, be nothing more
sweet than this, that two who loved each other should pray together, and
should feel that even death could never separate them, because their love
was set in the light of the Invisible. Charlie took my hand, too, and I rather
think his eyes were open—I know his face was turned to mine—but I
couldn't be sure of this, for my own were tightly closed.

I went outside the door with Charlie after he had said good-night to all
but me; and I do not think the silent night ever appeared so glorious before.
There was no moon, but the stars were shining calmly overhead, and a
sweet stillness, fragrant with the breath of spring, was all about us. I could
hear the twittering of birds in the magnolia tree, and wondered if they were
the love-lorn pair I had seen taking shelter there.

I fancy I was still thinking of the great words and the great thoughts of
the swelling psalm, but Charlie seemed to have forgotten all about it. He
evidently didn't want anything but me. And his voice was full of tender
passion as he began and pressed his suit again—right away, he said, it must
be right away. And he rang the changes a little on the yacht and Europe—I
wished so much he hadn't mentioned these, for I felt, in a kind of hungry
way, that they had nothing to do with the real case. He told me how much
he loved me, and how empty life would be without me at his side—but this
was in between, and I felt, away down in my heart, that he wasn't putting
things in their proper places. But he put his arm about me, and kissed me,
three or four times, I think. And then he tried again to make me promise—
but I wouldn't.

"When we go abroad, we'll go and see where that parson used to herd the
sheep," he said, and laughed. "It's a wonder he didn't bring his collie with
him, isn't it?" and I felt my cheeks burn with resentment at the jest. But I
didn't let him see it—for I felt I had no right to resent it. Besides, he had
herded sheep on the hills—he said so himself—and that was the worst of it.
I thought something like that then, at least, poor fool.

"Let me see its light again," said Charlie, taking my hand and looking at
my engagement ring; "it makes the whole night radiant, doesn't it?" with
which he kissed it, and held it to my lips that I might do the same. I couldn't
help glancing proudly at it, too, for it was a beauty—and mother said no girl
of our circle had ever had one so valuable.

Then Charlie went away and I went back into the parlour. They were all
there except Mr. Laird.

"Well, I took him to the attic myself," said my Aunt Agnes, "and it was
right amusing to see how he went on over it. I had told Lyn to light the fire,
and it really looked cozy in the dark when we went in. He said it was a
room fit for a king—said he felt sorry for the elder. Oh! he was just lovely
about it."

My mother's mind was engrossed with something else. "Wasn't that

mortifying at the table," she began, "about his having been a shepherd, I
mean—he doesn't understand our way of looking at things here, or he'd
never have mentioned it. I saw Mr. Giddens fairly jump in his chair."

"I thought it was lovely," I broke in with a vehemence I could not

restrain; "I don't see any disgrace in that. I think it's all the more to his
credit."
 "Oh! no, of course, I don't mean it's any disgrace," my mother
exclaimed, "but—it's so funny. It's so different from anything we've been
used to."

"You're right there," said my uncle, rising and moving towards the gas
jet, for he was sleepy. "That's the truth all right—he's different enough from
what we usually see. I think he's refreshing, if you ask me. But he had better
go slow about expressing his views on these niggers—if he doesn't want to
get into trouble. That's one thing sure."

"I wish he had told us a little more about his folks," said my Aunt Agnes,
yawning, and winding up her watch. "Did you notice he didn't tell us
anything about his father, except that he was a shepherd—that he is a
shepherd," she revised, "for he's still living. I do wonder if he's engaged,"
she added, placing the screen in front of the fire as she spoke.

"Of course," said I; "certainly he's engaged."

"How could you know?" queried my mother instantly.

"Well, of course, I don't—but why shouldn't he be?"

No argument could avail against this very easily, and the matter stood as
before.

"Oh!" my uncle suddenly exclaimed, his hand upon the chandelier, "I
forgot to give him this letter—Mr. Furvell gave it to me for him at the
church; it was sent on in care of Dr. Paine. But he can get it in the
morning," as he deposited it on the mantel.

I promptly crossed the room and picked it up.

"You inquisitive old maid!" said my mother in mild reproach. "Aren't

you ashamed of yourself?" as I stood examining the missive.

"I wanted to see what the old country stamp is like," I answered calmly,
my eyes still on the envelope. Aunt Agnes was looking over my shoulder in
an instant.
 "It's a man's handwriting," said she.

"Oh!" I said, "yes, I reckon it is."

"And it's got Virginia spelled with two n's," she added sorrowfully.

"You don't mean to say so!" said my mother, moving over to join us.

"The more the merrier," said my uncle; "and I'm going to put out the gas,
if it had a dozen. All aboard for the upper deck."

Wherewith we all moved towards the stairs. "The last I saw of your
Gordon Laird," said my aunt to me as we went up together, "he was
standing with his face hidden in those roses."

"Oh!" said I, "did you tell him who it was took them to his room?"

"No, never thought of it."

"I'm so glad," said I—with a little sigh.

VIII

"DEALINGS WITH THE SAMARITANS"

There's something lovely about having a lovely time. Now I know that
looks like a very foolish sentence when one reads it over after having
written it down. So many sentences are like that; you think they're strong,
beautiful, full of meaning and bright with fancy, while you're getting them
out—then they appear so pale and thin when you look them over. They're
like the fish that you're playing in the water: "What a whopper," you say,
"I've got this time!"—but how thin and small when it lies panting on the
grass.
 Yet I venture to repeat, as Mr. Furvell says in his sermons, I venture to
repeat: there's something lovely about having a lovely time. In this, I mean,
that it can never be taken away from you. There will, you know, be cold,
dark days, and bitter disappointments, and burning tears, and emptiness of
heart, till you quite forget that ever you were glad. But, even so, all these
can never rob you of that one hour, or day, or month of pleasure unalloyed.

Mr. Laird used to say something like this in the long happy days that
followed his arrival. It had not been hard to persuade him to prolong his
visit. Fortunately for us, his friend Dr. Paine was engaged to go, the very
next week, to the meeting of the General Assembly at Dallas; so it was
arranged Mr. Laird should tarry with us till he returned, perhaps longer—for
I think it was about decided that he was to take up mission work in Canada.

When I say those days were happy, I mean in a perfectly sane and
unfeverish kind of way, of course, with no thought of—of what every
woman looks for in every book she reads. That is, no calm and courageous
thought of it; although I shouldn't wonder if something of that, more or less
diluted, lies back of all real joy. Anyhow, Mr. Laird said that very thing, and
more than once, about the unloseableness of one hour or day of real
happiness. Whatever has been before of pain, or whatever may be ahead of
sorrow, he said, neither the one nor the other can ever make pure gladness
as if it had never been. It belongs to you forever, said the Reverend Gordon
Laird.

I should have known that I had no right to be so happy. For one thing,
Charlie had gone back to Savannah, and I should have been miserable over
that, if conscience had been half as faithful as it should have been. Then,
besides, he was waiting for my decision about Europe and the yacht—and I
had no claim to happiness till that was settled. And, most of all, I wasn't
sure about my love for him—very far from it—and so I should have been
quite wretched.

But I wasn't. I was shamefully happy. We were all happy, I think, to see
our visitor so thoroughly delighted with everything about him. After all is
said and done, American people take it as a compliment when old-country
folks seem to like them. I don't think we ever forget, even the most
democratic of us, that they have dukes and lords across the sea. And Mr.
Laird did seem so perfectly happy. For one thing, the weather was
delightful, and morning after morning found him and me—there was no one
else to act as cicerone—walking or driving about the lovely haunts that
surrounded our quiet little city. Everything was in the glory of bud and
blossom; fragrance was wafted on every breeze; the wistaria and the yellow
jasmine were gathered from a thousand trees. Sometimes we had picnics
too, making our way on our asthmatic little launch up the winding river;
sometimes we went together to the oyster market at the wharf, where he
seemed to be quite enchanted with the negroes' singing. "On the other side
of Jordan," I remember, was a great favourite of his, and he used to get
them to sing it again and again.

Indeed, everything connected with negroes seemed to have a strange

fascination for Mr. Laird. This perplexed me considerably, and mortified me
not a little too. Of course, having spent all my life among them, they were a
commonplace lot to me, and I regarded them with the kindly disdain which
marks every Southern girl's attitude to the negro race. But Mr. Laird seemed
to find a new vein in them—and, besides, he was so intensely human and so
tremendously interested in all human things. But he didn't know how
volcanic was the ground he walked on when he came into contact with the
darkies; and I may as well go aside here to tell how this provided the only
jarring note in all that memorable visit.

One day we were all on the piazza, engaged in that most delightful
occupation of waiting for dinner to be announced, catching savoury whiffs
the while that betokened its near approach. All of a sudden a coal-black
negress came through the back gate and stood at the foot of the porch steps.
Beside her stood a little curly-headed boy, about three years of age, clinging
to his mother's hand. She had been asking for something at the kitchen door,
I think—they were always asking for something, those darkies. Of course
we simply looked at her; I don't believe uncle quite did that—I think he
pretended to be reading a newspaper. But Mr. Laird, in his impulsive way,
went right down the steps and began talking to the woman. It was really
aggravating to see how flattered she seemed to be by his attention. And
then, to our horror—clergyman as he was and in full ministerial dress—Mr.
Laird actually took that pickaninny up, and flung him onto his shoulder,
pretending to be a horse or something of that sort. And the little negro dug
his hands into Mr. Laird's ruddy locks, while his Anglo-Saxon steed made
an exhibition of himself, galloping once or twice around the flower bed.
The mother grinned with delight in a way that I knew fairly maddened
uncle.

When Mr. Laird finally returned, panting, to his chair, uncle had quite a
time controlling himself to speak.

"Do you know who that child is, sir?" said my uncle, keeping his voice
under fine control.

"No," said Mr. Laird, innocent of everything; "no, I never saw him
before—do you, Mr. Lundy?"

Uncle threw his newspaper on the floor without a word. Mr. Laird, still
all unconscious, meekly stooped and picked it up. "I guess I'd better go and
fix my hair before dinner," he said, running his fingers through the startled
thatch.

"You'd better wash your hands, sir," said my uncle sternly, oblivious to
muttered appeals from both Aunt Agnes and my mother; "I'll tell you who
that child is, sir—it's a coon."

"What?" said Mr. Laird, beginning to apprehend.

"It's a coon, sir," my uncle repeated, as sternly as if he had been defining

some cub of the jungle; "it's a nigger coon."

"Well?" said Mr. Laird, looking uncle very steadfastly in the eye.

"Well," echoed my uncle, "yes, well." Then he paused, but soon gathered
fresh strength. "And I hardly need to tell you, I presume, sir, that it's not our
custom to fondle darkey babies—they're supposed to soil white hands, sir,"
he declared, waxing warm.

Mr. Laird looked innocently at his own. "It hasn't injured mine any, Mr.
Lundy," he said simply. "I don't quite understand what caused the—the
panic," he concluded, still looking very steadfastly at uncle.
 "Well, then, sir, I may as well tell you plainly that such an action as
yours would be considered quite—quite improper, to say the least. We don't
take familiarities like that with negro children."

"It's a harmless enough looking little chap," responded Mr. Laird,

nodding towards the receding youngster. He was toddling along beside his
mother, his hand in hers.

"They're harmless enough while you keep them in their place, sir,"
retorted my uncle. "But you must know that our people down here have
their own way of doing that. And you don't understand the situation, sir, you
don't understand the situation," repeated Uncle Henry, employing the
favourite formula of the South. "For instance, I heard you express surprise
at something the other day. You remember when Smallwood, the rector of
the Coloured Episcopal Church, called to ask Mrs. Lundy for a subscription
—you seemed horrified that he went to the back door, because he was a
preacher and dressed up like a bishop."

Mr. Laird nodded.

"Well, sir, if he was the Archbishop of Canterbury—or the Pope of Rome

—the back door's the place for him—so long as that's the colour of his skin.
There isn't a self-respecting white family in the city but would shut the front
door in his face. You understand, sir?"

"I don't think any more of them for that," was the quiet retort of Mr.
Laird.

"That may be, sir. They'll stand your contempt, sir—but they won't let a
pack of negroes walk all over 'em," my uncle's gorge rising again. "And I
hope to God none of our neighbours saw you on the gallop round our back
yard with a negro brat astride of you. You'd be finished here, sir, if they did.
Just before that wench came in here with her young 'un, I was going to tell
you that I met Mr. Furvell, and he asked me to give you an invitation, for
him, to preach in our church next Sunday. Well, sir, I hope it'll stand all
right—but if it got round town that you made a saddle-horse out of yourself
for a nigger whelp to ride, you'd have the church to yourself, sir; I reckon a
few old women might go to hear you, but you wouldn't have enough men
there to take up the collection."

"I can't do it, Mr. Lundy," said the minister, with amazing quietness.

"Can't do what?" demanded uncle.

"Can't preach for your friend," replied the other. "I'm engaged."

"Engaged for what?"

"Engaged to preach."

"Where?" said uncle, quite forgetful now of the debate. I think the same
question came in the same breath from my mother and Aunt Agnes.

"In the Coloured Methodist Church—I think they call it Zion," Mr. Laird
informed us calmly. "I was there the other day at a funeral—pretty
boisterous funeral it was, too—and the preacher got hold of me. They took
up a collection," Mr. Laird laughed, "and that was how they located me. I
didn't have anything but a shilling—a quarter, you call it. Well, he invited
me to preach for him next Sabbath, and I agreed. So I won't be able to
oblige Mr. Furvell."

"You agreed, sir?"

"Yes, Mr. Lundy, I agreed," repeated the stoical Scotchman.

"Good God!" said my Uncle Henry. My uncle was not a profane man—
but this was something extra.

"Don't get excited, Henry, don't," began my mother; "Mr. Laird can
easily change all that—he can get released from his engagement. He didn't
know we wanted him in our church."

"I'm not excited, ma'am," puffed my uncle; "I was never calmer in my
life—but the thing's preposterous, madam. It's utterly absurd—it's
ridiculous."
 "Yes, yes," broke in my Aunt Agnes, "of course, it's the easiest thing in
the world to arrange. All Mr. Laird has to do is to explain to that coloured
preacher that——"

"But I can't," interrupted Mr. Laird; "that is, I won't." The word fell
strangely on the ears of Southern ladies. "I gave him my promise—and
that's the end of it. I'll preach in Zion Church—or whatever they call it—
next Sabbath morning. If the Lord will," he added, with what appeared to us
all quite superfluous piety. I didn't know then that Scotch people never take
any chances.

"But you don't realize what you're doing, sir," remonstrated my uncle;
"you fail to realize——"

"I'm doing what no man will prevent," broke in our visitor, and his eye
was flashing like the diamond on my finger; "I'm going to preach the
Gospel to them, if I get the chance."

"That's all right," began my uncle, "that's all right in its way, but——"

"What's all right in its way?" demanded the Reverend Gordon Laird, his
voice quite resounding now.

"That's all right—that Gospel business," explained my uncle, evidently a

little at a loss. "The Gospel's all right in its place, but——

"Thank you," gave back Mr. Laird, his strong Scotch lip trembling,
"you're very magnanimous, sir."

"But you don't know what you're exposing yourself to," pursued my
uncle, apparently deaf to Mr. Laird's retort. "They'll make a fool of you in
the pulpit, sir. I'll tell you something, sir. Your sermon will be wasted. We
had a man here once—a white man—an evangelist, who expected to move
on anyhow. And he tried this little trick of yours—he preached to those
coons in their own church one day. And I heard later how they made a fool
of him. He preached about folks having to use the means. Good sermon,
too, sir. But he was no sooner through than the nigger preacher got up after
him—and he said he'd give them a little illustration. Then he told them a
ribald yarn, sir, right in the church; said he and his ten-year-old brother
were in bed once, and they heard their mother telling their father of some
devilment they'd been up to; and the father said he'd go up-stairs when he
had finished his supper. Well, this nigger preacher went on to say he got up
to pray—but his brother—his brother believed in using the means; and so
he said he wouldn't pray, but he'd get up and put something on. That's what
he told them, sir—an indecent tale—and the white preacher had to sit and
hear it," concluded my uncle, his cheeks burning with indignation.

"I won't give the black brother a chance to illustrate," said Mr. Laird
stolidly; "I'll close the service when I'm through." Then he laughed.

"You're trifling with me, sir," said my Uncle Henry chokingly, rising as
he spoke. I saw the quick pallor come to the cheek of my Aunt Agnes; as for
my mother, she was fairly trembling. As for me—well, I was terrified.

But just at this crisis a remarkable thing occurred. Mr. Laird didn't seem
to notice my uncle's movement at all. Indeed, he was not looking in his
direction, but sat gazing intently out towards the road that ran down to the
river and the bridge. Involuntarily my eyes followed his, and a moment
sufficed to reveal the object of his interest. For down the road towards us
there crept a fragile figure, swaying unsteadily, overborne with weakness
and her heavy load. This too was a negro woman, but cast in finer mould
than the stalwart black who had disappeared from view. The one who had
just hove in sight, as I could see even at that distance, was a comely
creature, more white than black, but yet bearing the fatal hue.

She was heavy laden, as I have implied. One arm bore a great bundle
enclosed in a white sheet—laundry, doubtless—while on the other she
carried a plump and complacent infant, crowing as it came, in that fine
oblivion of weight which marks the procession of the heaviest babies
everywhere. The young mother was pressing towards the river; a rusty skiff
lay beside the bridge, in which, no doubt, she was to make her way to the
negro settlement on the farther shore. She seemed ready to faint from the
fatigue of her double burden, yet she pressed on with almost rapid steps, as
if she must keep up till she reached the boat.
 It was this that had attracted the attention of Mr. Laird, so rapt in
observance that he evidently did not mark my uncle's movements. For the
latter had hardly risen before our visitor sprang quickly to his feet—I can
see him now, the tall black-robed figure, with high brow and auburn hair—
and strode down swiftly towards the road. Another moment brought him
alongside of the exhausted negress, whose white eyes could be seen wearily
surveying him as he approached. Without a word he seized both burdens
from her arms, the baby held high aloft as he led the way down to the boat.
The mother straightened herself and followed closely, as if she had taken a
new lease of life—it was not all due to the burdens she had lost, I'm sure—
and the heavy baby crowed with delight at this improved style of
locomotion. When, lo—miserabile dictu! as I learned in Virgil—this second
pickaninny, with that tonsorial instinct which seems to mark the race,
plunged its pudgy fingers where those of its predecessor had held high revel
one brief half hour agone, squealing for very joy as it clutched the auburn
mane of the Reverend Gordon Laird.

"Don't that beat the—the Dutch?" muttered my Uncle Henry from the
porch, gazing at the tall and supple form, the now laughing and half boyish
face, as our guest strode on towards the river, the baby and the bale like
feathers in his arms. A funny smile was on uncle's face, half of contempt,
half of admiration. "Those two brats both into his hair!" he murmured to
himself—"and I sure enough got into his wool," as the grin deepened on his
face.

He stood gazing. Then, recalling his sacred principles, he broke out

anew: "Good heavens, he's going over to Slabtown with her," for our
undaunted guest had by this time landed the bale in the bow of the skiff.
Still holding the baby high, he took the woman's hand and helped her over
the gunwale into the boat. A moment later we could see his shirt-sleeves
glistening in the sun, he himself seated in the middle of the skiff, starting to
pull vigorously for the other shore.

"Let him go," said my uncle between his teeth; "he's chosen his company
and he can have it. By heavens," he went on hotly, "I was never so insulted
in my life. What the—the dickens kind of a man is this Scotchman anyhow?
—I've seen men shot for less than this. I remember once in Texas——"
 "But, Henry," ventured my Aunt Agnes, "you shouldn't be so hard on
him—he doesn't understand our——"

"Then why the devil doesn't he keep his mouth shut?" snorted my uncle;
"comin' down here—like those infernal Yankees—an' tryin' to teach us how
to run our niggers. I've seen men reach for their hip pockets for less'n that,"
declared my uncle, glaring round the circle.

"Now, now, Henry," said my mother gently, "that'll do, Henry. You're not
much of an assassin—you know that. Besides, you can't help admiring his
pluck, can you, now?"

"He's too —— plucky," muttered Uncle Henry, gazing at the now distant
boat. Then followed a season of calm, broken only by the soft voices of my
aunt and mother as they tried to pour oil on the troubled waters.

"And what do you say? What's your opinion of your Gordon Laird—and
his nigger friends?" uncle suddenly demanded, turning on me as stern an
eye as dear old uncle could ever treat me to. I had not yet spoken.

"Do you want to know?" said I, straightening up.

"That's what I asked you for—what makes you so white?"

"I don't know. But I think he's glorious—just glorious," I said, looking
very straight at uncle. "And I don't care who knows it," I added. I believe I
stood up as I spoke—and I could feel my eyes flashing. "And you were
horrid to him," I cried, my voice trembling.

"Helen," my mother broke in reproachfully, "you forget yourself, Helen.

And do you know you're taking up with a stranger, against your uncle?"

But the latter didn't seem to hear what my mother said. He was staring at
me in a way that let me know the battle was won. He was a true Southerner,
was uncle, and if anything in the world appealed to him, it was courage. Yet
he had by no means surrendered.
 "Then you can meet him when he comes back," he said slowly in a
minute, nodding towards the river; "you can meet him and say good-bye for
the rest of us. You'll make our farewells to him, you see. And tell him the
world is wide—you can remember that, can't you, Helen?"

I smiled up into uncle's face. "I won't say good-bye for anybody but
Helen Randall," I replied, speaking just as slowly as he had done, "but I'll
do that—if I have to. And I'll tell him—I'll tell him," I repeated, gazing
down the sunlit river towards the sea, "that the world isn't so wide after all."
And I know not why, but a strange thrill swept over me from head to foot;
for the day was beautiful, and the fleecy clouds were overhead, and the air
was laden with the sweet breath of flowers, and God's sunlight was on the
river—and the river flowed on in silence to the sea.

Uncle Henry turned away and presently began a little pace up and down
the piazza. Fragments of the storm could still be heard: "Preach the Gospel,
indeed—act as assistant to a nigger. A pretty pass, when our guests turn
nurse for darkey coons—the attic's too small for him now," as he crossed
and recrossed the porch's sounding floor.

Presently he stopped and looked out over the river. The rest of us did not
need to look—we had been watching all the time. And, away at the end of
the long bridge—it was one of the longest in the state, nearly a mile—we
could just descry the moving figure, all in black again, of our returning
guest. He was coming back afoot, leaving the skiff to its owners.

Aunt Agnes took advantage of a long silence on uncle's part. "Well," she
said, "I guess I'll order dinner served; we can't wait any longer."

"That's what I say," agreed my mother; "we may just as well go on—it'll
be better anyhow," she added significantly.

"What?" said my Uncle Henry, turning round and looking at us.

"We were just saying we wouldn't wait dinner any longer," was the
explanation, "and anyhow, 'twould be better to go on—ourselves.
Considering everything, you know," and my Aunt Agnes sighed.
 Uncle stopped still and straightened himself up. "There'll be no dinner
till he comes," he said firmly, "if it's an hour. I hope I don't forget what's due
to a guest," as he looked gravely round the circle, "and especially a stranger
in a strange land." This was said with the air of a king and a very noble king
at that.

"Call Lyn," he said suddenly to me.

I did so. "Where are those niggers anyhow?" he asked impatiently as he

waited for her to appear. "I reckon they've all been watching the
procession," jerking his thumb towards the river. "Oh, here she is," as the
sable attendant pattered onto the porch. "Lyn, make me a mint-julep—make
it good."

"Yes, sah!" said the vanishing servant.

"Lyn! Oh, Lyn," he called again in an instant.

"Yes, sah; heah I is, sah!"

"Make two mint-juleps—and make them both good."

IX

LOVE'S TUTORSHIP

But those were happy days, as I have said already. Neither of us knew, I
fancy, whence came the silent music that was slowly gathering in our
hearts. But it was there, even though it came in secret strains, neither
recognizing, neither declaring. Of course, I was an engaged girl—and I was
trying to live up to it. I flaunted Charlie's ring, sometimes; and I often wrote
to him, sitting in the very same room with Mr. Laird the while, at my own
little desk in the corner. This itself had been one of Charlie's Christmas
presents. And I kept Charlie's letters in the tiny drawer in the top, but I had
so often been careless about it that mother saw to it herself that it was kept
securely locked; I knew where the key was secreted—on the ledge above
the library door. Mother said I really ought to carry it on a little gold chain
around my neck; but I had no chain—and I never could bear to have things
concealed about my person. Mother never glanced at his letters, of course—
but I sometimes used to show her bits of mine after I had written them, and
mother would suggest a word here and there, a little tenderer than the
original, and I would stick them in like plums in a pudding. Indeed—I may
as well tell it—mother rewrote a part of the one in which I kind of finally
renounced any immediate prospect of Europe and the yacht. She said no
member of our family had ever been so gifted with the pen as I—but that I
was a little astray on the facts. So she fixed my letter in a way to prevent it
being very final—for she said if it was ordained that I should go even yet, it
would be wrong to make it impossible. I fancied at the time that this was a
little like lending omnipotence a hand—but mother was an old-time
Calvinist, especially on the subject of me and Charlie, so I presumed it must
be all right to have it as she said.

I don't think any of them, and mother least of all, ever fancied that Mr.
Laird had the remotest connection with my engagement to Charlie. For he
was a minister—and that itself would be supposed to settle it as far as I was
concerned. Besides, he was a minister without a church, a kind of free lance
on a holiday. Then, too, we knew he was poor; he never said so, but there
are always certain signs; and he took great care of his clothes, and seemed
very cautious about money, except when he came across some one who was
very poor. And I'm sure we all remembered, though we almost never spoke
of it, that he had been a shepherd, and that his father was still keeping sheep
on the hills of Scotland—it never seemed to embarrass him a bit to refer to
this, which we all thought very strange.

Then, on the other hand, we hadn't the slightest reason—for a long time
at least—to think he cared a single thing for me. Indeed, I was just a little
piqued about this; one evening I took some fresh flowers to his room in the
attic, and his diary was lying open on the table. I don't know why—I have
no excuses to make at all—but my eye fell on the entry for the first day or
two he had been with us. I only glanced at it—any girl would, I think—to
see what he said about us. And I found references to uncle, and my mother,
and Aunt Agnes—even to Lyn and Moses more than once—but not a single
word about me. I didn't care a straw—only I had a good mind to take the
violets down-stairs with me again. But I didn't.

I have always fancied I would have been a good deal more interested if I
had thought he was engaged. But I soon made up my mind he wasn't,
although I had declared so stoutly to the contrary. For he never seemed to
want to be alone, especially in the twilight—and that's a sure sign; and he
left all his letters lying around after he had written them; and when he sang,
which he did very nicely, he preferred "Scots Wha' Ha'e" to "Annie Laurie";
and he was never melancholy, and never sighed—and he never asked the
price of things you need for house-keeping. So all these signs convinced me
thoroughly.

I have already said he didn't seem to care a thing for me. And yet—and
yet! For one thing, he loved to hear me sing—and he taught me two or three
of the old psalms that were in a leather-bound book he brought down-stairs
one day. Then he seemed so happy when I said I thought them beautiful.
And he talked with me so gently and reasonably about the darkey question
that I finally came to admit he did right in preaching in that coloured
church. And I wondered why he cared for what I thought at all. Besides all
this, he tried to get my promise that I would take a class in the Sunday-
school after he was gone—and I remember the gray kind of feeling I had
inside of me when he spoke of going away. I wouldn't promise, for I was
about as fit to teach a class as I was to be President of the United States—
but I promised to help in the library.

By and by, though I can't tell how, we even came to speaking about
Charlie. And he praised him, said he was such a clever business man, and
handsome. I didn't think much of that; but one evening, when we were
sitting on the shore all alone, he said he thought an engagement was such a
sacred thing—and he urged me, in a veiled kind of way, always to be true to
Charlie. And it was then I began to know—any true girl would know there
was something, when he talked like that.

And it was through that—that kind of conversation, I mean—that it all

came about. Because, by and by, I actually told him all about my
misgivings and my fears. Of course I did it all loyally enough—I always
praised Charlie, and always said I knew we'd likely be so happy because he
was, already—and I would try to be. And I told him one day how Charlie
was still urging me to consent that it should be soon, right away soon—and
any one would have thought, if they watched his expression, that he was
very concerned for Charlie's interests. For a strange paleness came upon his
face when he broke a silence that seemed rather long, I fancy, to both of us.

"I think you should," he said, but his voice was so strange that I
wondered where all his strength had gone to.

"What makes you say that?" I replied, and I don't believe my own voice
was quite natural.

"Because I think you'd be happier," he answered—"and I want you to be

happy." Then, for the first time, he looked at me, and his wonderful eyes
were filled with a kind of yearning such as I never saw before. So different,
indeed, from the look in Charlie's eyes, though nobody surely ever yearned
more earnestly than Charlie.

"I'm about as happy now," I answered, "as any girl could hope to be."

He looked at me enquiringly, and I thought the paleness was deeper than

before.

"Just like I am, I mean," I hastened to enlarge, "with a lovely house, and
having a lovely time—and uncle and aunt and mother all so good to me."

"It isn't the same," he said.

"The same as what?" I pressed, knowing I should not. But I remember

yet the thrill of peril and pain and joy that accompanied the words.

"The same as love—real love," he answered slowly. "It isn't the same at
all—the other is a new life altogether. That's what makes life holy—and
beautiful," he said, his voice so low I could scarcely hear. "That's the whole
of life—every bit of it," he added softly.
 I answered never a word. And in a moment he went on. "Yes, that's my
highest wish for you, Miss Helen—that you may find a sphere worthy of
you. For you'll forgive me, won't you, when I say you haven't found it yet?
You've got a wonderful nature," he suddenly startled me with, "and you've
got gifts and qualities that can be so useful, so wonderfully useful—and
they can give you such deep happiness too," he went earnestly on, "if they
only get a chance—if you only give them a chance; if they're developed, I
mean. And nothing will ever ripen them but—but that."

"But what?" murmured I, who knew right well.

"But love," he answered gently. "No woman's life ever really ripens
except through love. And—forgive me again, but I must say it—you're not
getting the most out of life, living as you are now, Miss Helen."

I looked at him searchingly. "As I am now?" I echoed. "Why, what kind

of life do you think I'm living?" But even as I spoke the words my own poor
heart provided all the answer. I felt rising up within me a conception, not
adequate or full, but quite sufficient at the time, of the hollowness and
barrenness of the poor frivolous life I was living. And I knew, oh, so well,
how far from the well-spring of real joy and peace were the glittering
streams at which I had sipped so long.

"What do you mean?" I urged, for he had not spoken.

"Oh," he began slowly, "I guess you know. Nobody can have a nature
like yours without knowing when it's not being satisfied. You have no work
—no calling, I mean. And you don't have any recreation, except only
pleasure—a little party here, and a picnic there, a card party yonder, and an
afternoon tea somewhere else. You know what I mean—all those things—
and a nature like yours can't live on confections," he added, smiling. "That's
why I'll be glad—when the other happens."

"What other?" repeated I, who knew right well again.

"You know," he said; and the great eyes looked solemnly and wistfully
into-mine.
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com