joining us is allan miller, founder and ceo of the news literacy projectct here to talk about the topic of fact checking and then it turns of the 2018. good morning. talk to her views about the project or what is a compounded to get it started? >> guest: with a national nonpartisan educational nonprofit that works with educators andt journalists to middle school, teach middle school and higho school students what to believeig in the digital age and given the tools to be informed and engaged participant in democracy.

i was a journalist for 29 years, most of the with the "los angeles times" in washington. when i started in 2008, this was long before alternative facts fakeke news. our goal is to give the next generation the tools to know what news and information to trust, to share and to act on. >> host: when a young person receives news information about politics off of social media, what makes you so they would not be able to see if it's true or not? >> guest: we know both from many studies and from her own expense in the class of last decade that busted they be digital, they don't have the ability to distinguish writable information from misinformation and information that is intended to inform them versus to persuade them to sell them to explore and to mislead them. they really need to have the

ability to essentially think likeke journalists, to determine what is verified information that becomes the basis for the actions, particularly as participants in the moxie. >> host: as force your program, what are the skills specifically teach them to achieve that? >> guest: we have a number of resources we have treated. our primary resources are virtual classrooms which can check out at a website. this is a c cutting edge engagig platform with 14 lessons to teach students foundational skills ins terms of verifying information about the first amendment, about world press freedom and really gives them the tools to make judgments about everything they see, read and hear in terms of its credibility. >> host: is this theoretical is there a real-world application? if so what is been the success rate as far as getting students to a place with the convert denies information they are

receiving? >> guest: this is very much in the real world. we are enriching students with a which is on the devices -- reaching their queen or programs work. we do assessments to determine the impact so we know students immediately are more confident about their ability to discern and create credible information. i have greater knowledge about the free press and the moxie more likely to do things like correct mistakes when they find them c and vote in elections whn old enough to do so. >> host: give me an example of how this works, sort your program is concerned and help us to the chiefs of these things. >> guest: that technology is available to educators and we have now got many thousands of educators use to reach over 110,000 students in every state and u.s. they use in the classroom and students can show the students the lessons as as a group, then do it one-to-one. students can do the lesson at home and discuss them.

we have other resources we have credit as well including the weekly newsletter that sees a look at that weeks rumors,, hoaxes and conspiracy theories in terms of, turns them into lessons. we have multiple resources that we're using working to educators to reach the next generation and really to give fax a fighting chance from our guest will be with us to talk but these topics and point asking questions you can do so i on the phone lines. what's a telltale sign if you're reading news off the website or on a form from what is a telltale sign a student should be concerned or lease question what they're reading? >> guest: we want them to look and see if the information is provided for them to make of the online. if it is intended to provoke emotion, to incite or to persuade, that's a red flag.

we want them to ask if they can tell who created the information. is it from a reputable source? what are the sources? we teach them about eyewitness sources, expert sources, anonymous sources may be red flag. what's the documentation? is there enough information for them to make up their own mind? is the elemental fairness? is their bias? we teach them about something we call confirmation bias which is what they bring to what they're reading so that they can have a bit c of distance. >> host: when it comes to bias how do you teach students to flesh that out? >> guest: we have lesson on bias, and we teach them what other signs in terms of the language, the images, is the information presented in a dispassionate neutral tone, or is it intended to provoke or persuade or insight? are there multiple points of

view provided? where giving them the tools to make those assessments and to understand that everything isn't necessarily driven by bias but that they should lookth for in everything they are doing. >> host: when you talk to the students are you focusing on mainline publications, how much of that first online publications, opinionon sources? do teach those skills as first apply to all those front? >> guest: we have a foundation lesson with a person reduce we teach the difference between news, opinion, advertising, entertainment, propaganda based on its primary purpose. we want them to make those distinctions. we do not student to any source, any particular platform nor do we stir them away from it. we want to give them the tools to make those judgments, to reach them atto a point where they're creating habits that will last them a lifetime.

>> host: the students themselves, what are the tenuous bars where they're getting information from? what is the main driver of the source of information? is a political or other things? >> guest: most other information through social media, , getting through the feeds. they are giving news but it's disaggregated. it's coming along with everything else. they are often on snapchat and instagram and twitter, and they are on their devices a tremendous amount. we are reaching them where you live. the ability to discern information, it's a survival skill. it's teaching literacy for the 21stst century. >> host: your assumption is can take the source like a snapchat post a couple information from it in order to determine whether or not a new story is credible or not? >> guest: yes. there are b basic things that a student or anybody can do. you can look at comments to see

if there questions raised about the post. you can cut and paste a piece of information see if it's been challenge those four or any of the fact checking organization of look that up or if an image which thereoo are many of them t there, you canif do a reverse image research and find with the context is and perhaps we may have originated. >> host: we have calls lined up for you. this is from missouri up first, democrat's line. you're on with our guest allan miller. go ahead. >> caller: thank you very much for c-span. i want to make a comment. we have two people running for senate in missouri. neither one of them has signed anything, they can sayin anythig they want to and less it signed. the thing about our gas tax that they you don't even want to talk about, yet they're trying to do

without an audit, independent audit on our transportation system, we as voters are absolutely going to vote on something we know nothing about. that's ridiculous. there's got to be independent audit on everything that we sign for. that's my comment. thank you very much for c-span. >> host: does any of that the desk of techniques you apply to students and his or a level foror adults to have the same kind of skills? >> guest: i think these skills are very broadly applicable. i think the view of races a good point in terms of the need particularly in an election to check facts. we do live in an age where it is more good and credible information that any time in the history online. i think it's incumbent upon the individual voter to search for

the information and check their facts before they go to the polls. >> host: berkeley springs west virginia carl is next. you are on. republican line, go ahead. >> caller: i was watching cnn, and this guy, lemon, whatever his name is, he made the statement that president trump is evil, he is a a racist, he a white nationalist. can you fact check that? does he, using mean to little kids? can you fact check that to see if that's true? >> guest: well, for civil i don't know exactly what donlon said in this case. i think that if, there is clearly, not to speak necessary to that statement but there's clearly a lot of opinion that

gets infused with news coverage in cable stations. it's one of the things that we encourage students to distinguish between fact and opinion, and these are things you can disagree about in some cases, and then obviously where there's an opportunity where there are facts, to fact check those things as well. >> host: what is the grade range you work with? >> guest: we work with middle school and high school student, six to 12th grade and then we got home schoolers and afterschool programs and libraries that are also using this platform. >> host: you talk about social media. the previous viewer product television. how powerful this information would come to that grade range? how powerful is television these days versus social media? >> guest: i think what we find is that for the most part students are getting their news

and information to social media. they live on their devices. to the extent that when we ask students questions about television news, what often comes up our the satire shows. they tend to watch "the daily show" and john oliver. they feel that in many cases they get the f news from them. we actually use those shows in the platform because they are interesting as a blend. there's a component of news, third a component of the pinion that ultimately those shows are entertainment trend but they treat them as news about. >> guest: they may view them as news and he gets them to focus on news related topics but it's something we need underscore, the fact is, and jon stewart was always quick to say he wasn't a a journalist. that they are fundamentally entertainment vehicles. >> host: democrat's line from washington, d.c. hello. you are on with our guest. go ahead omak i had a question

and a comet. about fact checking, i feel like a lot of our major news outlets don't really give us all the information and feet into our confirmation bias. one thing when i said our, i mean democrats, african-american and a whole lot i was taught that democrats are the lesser of evils. but i've a problem with how the 2016 election with her and wondered if you could clear up something about pied piper strategy thing. because i don't see it being addressed at all and it's just weird to me that i feel like we are accusing russia of do what the democratic party did. they made sure that the worst of the other side was the we focus on, ted cruz, donald trump and ben carson. and there's an e-mail -- >> host: before you go further, because of what our guest does, how do you want to apply that specificallyy comes o

-- >> caller: did you see this taking place in 2015 where the media talked about trump, you know, , until he became the candidate? he didn't have any money and now they're trying to say that it's russia's fault. >> host: thanks. mr. mueller. >> guest: well, it's a very broad question. i think in terms of the media, for civil i think we have to be theful in talking about media. it's an extremely broad term. for the most part news organizations covered the campaign, have been covering what's been revealed about russian disinformation and ongoing mueller investigation, and doing it on an ongoing basis.

so i'm not familiar with exactly what the caller is referring to in terms of the pied piper strategy. >> host: as one of the information, 62% of people worldwide agree the average person can't tell good journalism from rumors or falsehood. future as a former journalist yourself? >> guest: this is part of the motivation in my starting the project. i felt that news organizations in general did not get a good job about in the public what we did and what we did and how we did it. i think it left them very quite vulnerable to attacks and the self-inflicted wounds. ii think it's a major incentive for us. we are about creating a next generation of informed consumers that will demand quality journalism and, of course, speedy we will leave this here and go live to the u.sap