The rule helps social media thrive by protecting free speech and innovation, but in turn reduces accountability for harmful content like misinformation and hate speech. Ideally, we need to strike the right balance with reforms that keep its benefits yet encourage better moderation. #UWJ201 #303

Partisan journalism often reinforces existing beliefs by presenting one-sided views, making it harder for Americans to see opposing perspectives. To rebuild trust, journalism could focus on fact-based reporting and create spaces for respectful dialogue between differing viewpoints. #UWJ201 #303

I think social proof is the most effective, especially in today’s digital world. People trust the experiences of others, which is why reviews and influencers, for example, can be so persuasive. Seeing that a product is popular or widely approved encourages us to not miss out. #UWJ201 #303

We certainly should be concerned. While real-time bidding makes ads more “relevant,” it also means people we don't know are learning a lot about us. The lack of transparency and control over how that data is collected and used is a growing ethical issue. #UWJ201 #303

I think it can absolutely change someone's viewpoint, especially over time. Social acceptance is a huge motivator, and if you repeatedly hear the same perspective, it can start to feel like the truth, even if it initially conflicted with your own beliefs. #UWJ201 #303

I imagine people continued to believe the conspiracy because of confirmation bias and directional-based motivation, seeking info that aligned with their pre-existing beliefs. Other factors, such as distrust in the media, also likely played a role. #UWJ201 #303

Absolutely. The media, while a significant factor, is not the sole one. Others might include political leader exploitation, algorithmic bias, or economic and lifestyle inequalities. Also, the decline of community institutions, once the heart of many areas, may play a role. #UWJ201 #303

As Lexie said, bias in the news is essentially inevitable. We can limit its effects, however, by seeking out sources that prioritize factual reporting over sensationalism, critically evaluating framing, and cross-checking stories across multiple outlets. #UWJ201 #303

Being more informed on such topics would increase personal data protection knowledge (i.e. recognizing phishing or using stronger passwords). People could learn more through online courses, tech/government websites, school programs, or even social media campaigns. #UWJ201 #303

It is likely a combination. The media often prioritizes domestic issues and sensational content over thorough international coverage. However, Americans also need to be willing to actively seek out info on international affairs, which then might affect the way media covers such content. #UWJ201 #303

This decision by Trump’s administration could lead to more biased media coverage, as favored outlets may get better access while others are excluded. This may result in further polarization of the media landscape, undermining public trust in news transparency. #UWJ201 #303

I would say yes, as news often emphasizes sensationalism and outlier events, which can change public perception. For example, the focus on protest violence or extremist views can affect understanding of broader social issues, much like shows glamorize materialism and wealth. #UWJ201 #303

Framing is hard to avoid because news is always shaped by the way people see and describe things. I don’t think it would be possible for news to be completely unbiased, but journalists should strive to at least be aware of framing and show different sides to enhance fairness. #UWJ201 #303

Framing isn’t necessarily misinformation or bias but rather a normal way of presenting information by focusing on certain aspects. Framing crosses a line if it intentionally twists facts, omits key details, or uses emotional manipulation to deceive people or push a specific agenda. #UWJ201 #303

I think gatekeeping on online platforms could deepen ideological divides by creating echo chambers and limiting exposure to diverse viewpoints. This might then fuel misinformation or erode trust in the platform, making constructive dialogue harder to achieve. #UWJ201 #303

I would say yes. More attention is given to wealthy individuals/corporations, and the news agenda then maintains existing power structures. This likely causes disproportionate coverage of topics impacting influential figures while diminishing issues that affect the working class. #UWJ201 #303