A Nation Divided: How disinformation tears us apart

Begin the lesson with a simple “This or That” activity where you ask the students to choose between two given options. They may stand up and move to one side of the room to signify their choice. Afterwards, ask some students from both sides to explain their stance. 

This or That?

• Sinigang or Adobo
• Mountains or Beaches
• Hot or Cold
• Cats or Dogs

Segue to introducing the topic and objectives of the lesson which will explore the relationship between disinformation and polarization in the country. Ask the students what they know about the concept of “polarization” and, based on the activity they just did where they were divided into two opposing camps, how would they differentiate the idea of having a healthy debate in a class or society from a polarized situation?

Start by unpacking the concept of polarization. Explain that not every form of it is harmful to democracy. Scholars argue that “a certain degree of polarization in a democratic system is not only normal, but also desirable” (Milačić, 2021). Polarization starts to become toxic and dangerous to democracy when people increasingly see politics and society in terms of ‘us’ versus ‘them’, a phenomenon that is observed in many parts of the world today.

Us-vs-them: When polarization becomes toxic

Toxic polarization can occur for several reasons. It can be based on socio-economic divides and ideology (values based), or it can be based on a divisive issue or personality like a government leader. But the polarization that has the greatest potential to be toxic is one that is based more on identity issues and less about policies or ideology. Since identities (e.g., nationality, religion, race, ethnicity) are considered unchangeable and non-negotiable, it is more difficult to find compromise and agree on an acceptable middle-ground as compared to discussing and negotiating, for example, fiscal policies, investment priorities, etc. (Milačić, 2021).

Tribalism is a characteristic of toxic polarization. It can be observed when the society is divided into “tribes”, into us versus them (in-group versus out-group) where each side views the other “out-group” with increasing distrust and hostility. Meanwhile, they feel loyal to, and trusting of, their own camp – without examining their biases or factual basis of their information. Each side views the other political group/supporters as a threat to the nation or their way of life if that other political group is in power.

Once a polarized way of thinking seeps in and voters feel deeply divided psychologically and spatially, it is very hard to reverse. Polarization rewards extreme positions and weakens centrist moderates (McCoy, 2019).

To concretize the concept of polarization, move the discussion to the context of the Philippines. Use the prior knowledge of your students to discuss different examples of polarizing mis-/disinformation in the Philippines. Identify who are targeted by these contents and how they contribute to polarization between administration supporters and critics.

While tackling current, and possibly controversial or sensitive issues, ensure that free and open discussion is encouraged in the class. Allow your students to comfortably express their views as long as they are able to support them with evidence or reason. Limit yourself from conveying your own perspective as this can influence student participation. Lastly, do not expect all students to have strong or fully-formed views on issues. Nonetheless, encourage everyone to share their observations (regardless of their personal stance on issues) and fully engage by actively listening to their peers. 

Polarization in the Philippines

Under the administration of former president Rodrigo Duterte, political polarization in the country is manifested in how Filipinos have positioned themselves as ‘DDS’ (Duterte Diehard Supporters) or as ‘Dilawans’ (Yellow), in reference to the shade of past administration’s political party. Moreover, political polarization has been observed in the way discourse has been conducted through vitriol, misinformation and lack of rational debates (Deinla et al., 2022).

Mis-/Disinformation as a tool for polarization

Similar to what is observed in the Republican Party in the United States, many pro-administration politicians in the Philippines during the Duterte regime use highly divisive rhetorical strategies that highlight differences between groups of people, creating us-versus-them camps in society. Such polarizing strategies also attack the credibility of established institutions such as mainstream media and sow distrust or conspiracy among supporters. Divisive rhetoric is defined as “language that has the distinct intention of pitting groups against each other” (Winans, 2019). Indeed, political mis-/disinformation has been used as a divisive rhetorical tool meant to further polarization in society. 

Examples of polarizing mis-/disinformation in the Philippines

• Dolomite Beach project: Manipulated images of the Manila Bay project circulated online taking advantage of the stark division between admin supporters and critics. Supporters view the project as a laudable government investment in the country’s tourism while critics were vocal about how the funds should have been directed to address the pandemic
• #SeaGames2019Fail: During the Philippines' hosting of the 2019 Southeast Asian Games (SEA Games), government critics and supporters traded criticism and attacks online about logistical blunders, delays, corruption and other controversies (e.g., P50-million cauldron). In an investigation by Rappler, they discovered how a pro-government propaganda network was mobilized to counter government criticisms online by accusing mainstream media of spreading “fake news” and inciting hate and distrust.

Sources: 

• Deinla, I. B., Mendoza, G. A. S., Ballar, K. J., & Yap, J. K. (2022). The link between fake news susceptibility and political polarization of the youth in the Philippines. Asian Journal of Political Science, 30(2), 160–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2022.2117713 
• Winans, T. (2019). Divisive Rhetoric and Adverse Language in American Political Discourse. [Master's Dissertation, Boston University]. OpenBU. https://hdl.handle.net/2144/39612 

Prior to the session, the students are asked to read up on news and reports about “Oplan Tokhang”, an issue that has driven heated polarization among the Filipino public throughout the term of the previous administration. In this segment of the lesson, based on their recollection and prior research, the students will identify different viewpoints in support of and against the said policy. This activity can be done in small groups to facilitate participation of all students. 

Refer to the following analytical papers on the Philippine drug war to guide your discussion:

• Simbulan, N. (2020). Human Rights as the Foundation of Good Governance: The Ironies of the Philippine Experience. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/seac/2020/06/01/human-rights-as-the-foundation-of-good-governance/
• Uyheng J. & Montiel C.J. (2021). Populist polarization in postcolonial Philippines: Sociolinguistic rifts in online drug war discourse. Eur J Soc Psychol; 51: 84–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2716   

Once some viewpoints/arguments have been identified, ask the students to analyze each argument based on these guide questions:

• Is this argument based on facts, first-hand experience, or appeals to emotion? If it is based on facts, is it accurate?
• What words or terms are uttered by the in-group and out-group?
• Can you identify the origin or original source of this argument?
• What does this argument reveal about the values and perceptions of the polarized groups towards former president Duterte, drug users, and the police?
• What does this argument reveal about the perceptions of the polarized groups towards their own tribe (in-group) and their out-group?

Aside from the Philippine drug war, you may choose to discuss other polarizing issues in the country such as the Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGO) operations, Mayor Alice Guo, and her citizenship; the West Philippine Sea dispute; or the COVID-19 vaccine issue.

From doing textual analysis of examples of polarizing mis-/disinformation, you can now bring the discussion to a broader analysis of the context where polarization in the country is much more pronounced, in social media. You may watch the following video to learn more about the implications of algorithms, echo chambers, and our psychological vulnerabilities like confirmation bias in the intensification of polarization in society:

• ABS-CBN News (2022, June 10). FACT CHECK: Ano ba ang echo chamber sa social media? | NXT [YouTube video]. https://youtu.be/TfMKKHEdk4A?feature=shared
• Big Think (2018, December 19). How news feed algorithms supercharge confirmation bias | Eli Pariser | Big Think [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prx9bxzns3g

Social media, Echo chambers, and Polarization

Deinla et al. (2022) wrote that “as online political conversations exist in isolation from one another, social media can become a breeding ground for polarization.” As discussed in Lesson 6 (“Algorithms, Bots, and Deepfakes: How worried should we be about technology?”), social media platforms have distinct features that make it perfect for disinformation, and hence polarization, to thrive in. 

We receive personalized content on social media because of algorithms. Social media, then, becomes a kind of online echo chamber created by algorithms which gives priority to posts that reinforce our pre-established views. When we only encounter information or opinions that reflect our own, and are isolated from divergent perspectives, it can lead to polarization. 

Besides algorithms, echo chambers are also fueled in part by confirmation bias, our psychological tendency to cherry pick information that suits our preconceived beliefs. Related to this is motivated political reasoning, which describes our motivation to defend our preexisting beliefs than to be accurate, especially when faced with new and conflicting information or experiences

Sources:

Deinla, I. B., Mendoza, G. A. S., Ballar, K. J., & Yap, J. K. (2022). The link between fake news susceptibility and political polarization of the youth in the Philippines. Asian Journal of Political Science, 30(2), 160–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2022.2117713

At this point, you ought to clarify with your students that mis-/disinformation and social media algorithms do NOT automatically polarize people. While there are various socio-political and psychological factors at play, polarization can still be prevented or fixed. This can be done by promoting habits of mindfulness, empathy, and persuasive communication. 

You may opt to discuss with your students the mechanics of the Performance Task (Project Depolarize) first, and afterwards, discuss the three habits to overcome polarization as reminders for them to safely and effectively conduct the task. 

3 Habits to Overcome Polarization

Keep calm and check for emotional triggers

Mis-/disinformation, or any piece of online content, are usually designed to elicit extreme emotional response and/or confirm our existing biases. Fake news peddlers know very well that this will increase the likelihood that the content will be clicked, liked, and shared. So the first habit to overcome polarization is to keep calm and check for emotional triggers. 

According to LaGarde and Hudgins (2020) there is a largely untapped link between news literacy and Social and Emotional Learning (SEL), defined as “process through which children and adults understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions” (Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning or CASEL). News literacy education has focused a lot on teaching about facts, sourcing, and verifiability that we might be forgetting how much emotions play a role in our consumption of news and online content. Through SEL, students are taught to recognize and manage their emotional triggers, especially when it comes to news and online content.

Practicing empathy

Moreover, fundamental to SEL is the practice of empathy. By recognizing the emotional basis of our own views and that of others, we are able to be in a position to empathize. MacDonald (2021) reminds that we must realize that those with whom we disagree are often coming from a place of fear and anxiety. While perspective taking and validation will not necessarily transform viewpoints of others, these important skills can help maintain relations with those who hold different worldviews and prevent further alienation.

Moral reframing

Recognizing that most people are naturally inclined to make political arguments grounded in their emotions and own moral values, sociologists recommend a way to effectively construct political arguments that are not divisive. The technique is called “moral reframing”, which is done by reframing a position that an individual would not normally support in a way that is consistent with that individual's moral values.

Sources:

• LaGarde, J. & Hudgins, D. (2020). News Literacy Must Include Social Emotional Learning. School Library Journal. https://www.slj.com/story/News-media-literacy-must-include-social-emotional-learning-SEL-librarians 

• MacDonald, F. (2021, November 14). How to function in an increasingly polarized society. The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/how-to-function-in-an-increasingly-polarized-society-171081 

• Dickinson, K. (2022, April 25). Moral reframing: How to work with, not against, our tribal tendencies. Big Think. https://bigthink.com/the-learning-curve/moral-reframing/ 

Parker C. (2015). New research shows how to make effective political arguments, Stanford sociologist says. Stanford Report. https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2015/10/framing-persuasive-messages-101215

Fixing polarization is a long and tedious process. This only means that mindfulness and empathizing should always be paired with patience and a hopeful mindset. Ask your students what it means for them to learn and practice empathize amid the polarization in society. Why is empathy important, and what are you hopeful for?