Media literacy must transcend its current consumer-focused framework and embrace its potential as a cornerstone of civic empowerment.
When introducing media literacy to younger audiences during training sessions, I often begin with a simple question: “When you notice something wrong in your immediate environment, what can you do?”
Almost without fail, the first response is: “You stage a public protest.” While public protests are legitimate forms of expression, I challenge them to consider the practical limitations of relying on protests for every issue. The next common answer is: “You have to form a political party!”
When I explain that forming a political party requires time, resources, and, most importantly, people, the students often find themselves at a loss for alternative solutions to address problems in their environment.
When prompted about democratic elections, their typical reaction is dismissive: “Hah, elections are useless; nobody does that!” I then point out the irony that they would rather form a political party than simply participate in voting. Their response? “Well... the other people will vote for us!”
These exchanges reveal a deep disconnect between the individual’s role as a consumer and their civic responsibilities. They also highlight a broader misunderstanding of systemic civic functions, which depend on balancing individual rights with the common good and fostering trust in institutions like mass media, democratically elected governments, and the processes that uphold democracy.
Mass media: Neutral courier or an information trader?
People often form their perception of politics through public protests or party disputes, as portrayed by mass media, which excels at highlighting social and political conflicts. In this context, the media presents itself as a neutral conduit—an invisible postman delivering news from its source to the audience in an ostensibly impartial manner.
This is also reflected in the current EU definition of media literacy, which emphasizes enhancing individuals' critical thinking skills, their ability to navigate the digital media landscape, and their capacity to identify disinformation. Implicit in this definition is an acknowledgment that traditional mass media now plays a relatively minor role in propagating disinformation compared to major digital intermediaries.
That is naturally not the case when one looks at reality. We can see mass media as an information trader, we can see the impact of the diminished role of mass media as the fourth estate and as public watchdog, we can see media companies having clear alignments with certain political parties and focusing solely on the “critical thinking” and the “ability to better navigate the digital media environment” misses the mark almost completely.
Even when disinformation isn't explicitly at play, the mass media industry wields considerable influence over public perception by distorting the truth, excluding certain perspectives, or amplifying others disproportionately. This power stems not only from overt manipulation but also through subtler mechanisms—such as framing stories in ways that emphasize certain narratives while marginalizing alternative views, or by prioritizing content that appeals to commercial interests over unbiased reporting.
Moreover, the intrinsic biases embedded within editorial policies or the pursuit of ratings can lead to a selective portrayal of events that reinforces existing power structures and feeds into collective misconceptions. As a result, even well-intentioned reporting may inadvertently contribute to a skewed understanding of complex issues, highlighting the need for critical engagement and systemic reform to ensure that multiple voices and nuanced realities are adequately represented in the public sphere.
Source: unsplash.com
This raises a critical question: does the state view media literacy as a tool to empower its citizens, or do its calls for media literacy signal an acknowledgment of the declining influence of traditional media and the inadequacy of its regulatory framework in addressing the dominance of big tech and media conglomerates?
Fix the arrow, not the target
The challenges of truth-seeking—a central focus of media literacy training and policies—were starkly evident during the COVID-19 pandemic. A segment of the population chose to rely solely on their own judgment regarding vaccine effectiveness, dismissing external sources of information.
Using various mass media channels, these groups rallied others to join their pursuit of “truth” by adhering to a pre-pandemic framework of media literacy—one that emphasized individual agency and scepticism toward media reporting. In an era dominated by the attention economy and algorithmic content distribution, this approach proved disastrous.
Certain groups exploited these dynamics, producing “truth-seeking” content that not only fuelled distrust in democratically elected governments and institutions but also bypassed regulatory frameworks and targeted audiences already adrift in an information chaos.
Rather than striving to rebuild trust, media literacy trainers emphasized self-reflection on personal biases—a call that becomes virtually impossible when individuals lack the necessary information and basic literacy skills to decode mass media messages effectively.
Media literacy and an active citizen
The “Other people will vote for us” anecdote exposes a significant shortcoming in the current conception of media literacy—a shortcoming also evident in the EU’s definition. There is an almost complete neglect of individual civic responsibility, reducing citizens to mere consumers. Moreover, media literacy is frequently conflated with digital literacy, where technical skills in using digital tools tend to overshadow the critical evaluation of mass media content.
While critical reading of mass media reports is certainly important, it represents only one facet of media literacy. A comprehensive approach requires exploring the intricate relationship between the media's role in sustaining a functioning democracy and the individual's civic responsibility to make informed political decisions. In this broader context, effective media literacy means understanding not just how to critically evaluate content, but also how that content influences democratic engagement through the inputs it provides.
EU approaches to media literacy often neglect the crucial connection between media literacy and civic engagement, reducing it to merely a consumer skill. Even when media literacy training aims to empower individuals to discern truth from falsehood, it overlooks an essential question: why should people be motivated to seek the truth?
Rather than pursuing a purely philosophical quest for truth, media literacy should target tangible, civic-oriented goals. Accurate media reporting matters because it ensures that political decisions are based on facts and honest information. Consequently, civic-focused media literacy training should not only enhance individual skills but also foster a systemic understanding of mass media, democratic institutions, and the intricate connections between them.
In conclusion, media literacy must transcend its current consumer-focused framework and embrace its potential as a cornerstone of civic empowerment. By fostering critical engagement with media and emphasizing the interplay between accurate reporting, democratic institutions, and individual civic responsibility, media literacy can become a vital tool for strengthening democratic processes.
This shift requires a re-imagining of media literacy training, prioritizing not just individual skill development but also a collective understanding of the media's role in shaping informed, active citizens.
