Abstract
Over recent years, international organisations like the EU and UNESCO have set up a number of proposals, models and frameworks that seek (i) to map and to conceptualize digital literacy and related concepts, e. g. information, digital or media literacy, digital competence, digital skills and (ii) to formulate policies and recommendations based on the conceptualizations developed. The resulting frameworks, such as Digital Competence (DigComp) developed by the EU, or Media and Information Literacy (MIL) developed by UNESCO, have a strong formative power on a global scale. Affected are policies, laws, regulations, research activities, and academic disciplines like media pedagogy and mindsets. Do these frameworks consider the effects of disruptive attempts by digital media to intervene in public debates e. g. social bots, fake news and other manifestations of biased or false information online? Do they offer avenues for reflection and action to address them? Guided by these questions, this paper studies the flagship frameworks on digital education of the EU and UNESCO, DigComp and MIL. It finds biases in both frameworks. To different degrees, both tend to overemphasize the practical and instrumental use of digital literacy.
Highlights
Modern societies rely to a considerable degree on public communication
Disruption of communication in the public sphere, e. g. in social media, can be precarious and is likely to trigger resonance in one or several function systems of society and to manifest itself again via communication. It is against this background that disruptive attempts of digital media to intervene in public debates e. g. social bots, fake news and other manifestations of strategic and possibly IT-supported deployment of false or twisted information online, currently receive a lot of attention
For Digital Competence (DigComp) and Media and Information Literacy (MIL), this means being reflective about their potentials and limits, about the boundary conditions of their work and able to consider the effects and side-effects they generate
Summary
Modern societies rely to a considerable degree on public communication. Disruption of communication in the public sphere, e. g. in social media, can be precarious and is likely to trigger resonance in one or several function systems of society and to manifest itself again via communication. G. in social media, can be precarious and is likely to trigger resonance in one or several function systems of society and to manifest itself again via communication. It is against this background that disruptive attempts of digital media to intervene in public debates e. At the time of writing this article, this is true where academic publications are concerned.[1] The motivation behind the work outlined in this paper has been sparked by the sharp contrast between the silence of the academic literature and the call for an www.medienpaed.com > 5.7.2017 62 increased engagement in media literacy in public debates on social bots and related themes like fake news (Chaffee 2016). The goal of the paper is to answer the question whether and to what degree current frameworks of digital competence or literacy, introduced by the EU and UNESCO, cater for systematic manipulation of public debates in social media via, e. g. social bots
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
