‘‘
The government’s 2021 Online Media Literacy Strategy, for all its shortcomings, was a call to action, with a limited amount of funding...
MILA Update
Media and information literacy – progress, but cautious
M
EDIA and information literacy (MIL) nowa- days features more in public discourse in the UK than was
the case three or four years ago. The government’s 2021 Online Media Literacy Strategy, for all its shortcomings, was a call to action, with a limited amount of funding to support a variety of small-scale initiatives.
Ofcom continues, gradually, to develop its regulatory role beyond its established programme of behavioural research into media consumption. And the tortuous journey of the Online Harms Bill through Parliament continues to generate debate about how best to equip society in the fi ght against a range of online harms. It is regrettable that the government inexplicably chose to remove the media literacy (ML) clauses from the initial version of the Bill. Organisations such as Full Fact are rightly pushing for the draft legislation to re-introduce strong media literacy provisions, with a beefed-up duty on Ofcom1
. It remains to be seen
whether the government will comply. As described in Information Professional last October, the then Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS, which has since been trimmed) issued two calls for proposals last year for projects to further the aims of the Strategy. Consequently, 17 organisations received between them more than £1m to pilot new ways of boosting people’s ML, to counter threats including online abuse and disinformation2
. This is useful seed
investment, but not nearly enough for a joined-up national programme. Under the two calls, funding was directed at (i) hard-to-reach and vulnerable groups, with investment in local or regional community-led projects across England; and (ii) at initiatives
March 2023
that address the overarching challenges set out in the Strategy. Benefi ciaries include young people working on social media projects; care workers; older adults; parents and carers of teenagers; teachers; and vulnerable and marginalised women.
One of the funded projects includes a reviewing role for the Media and Information Literacy Alliance (MILA), the collaborative initiative instigated by CILIP and its Information Literacy Group. The project, led by Professor Julian McDougall at Bournemouth University, will develop a ML evaluation framework. This will feature a theory of change to measure the diff erence that ML makes to people’s lives, including longer term impact on behaviour. Ofcom has also been active in this particular area, with the unveiling in February of its own evaluation toolkit, a series of how-to guides to help organisations plan and carry out evaluations of their ML interventions. The toolkit incorporates two searchable online libraries: the fi rst lists over 120 ML initiatives delivered mostly by third sector players, but also by commercial organisations and public agencies; the second list nearly 80 ML research projects. Ofcom welcomes suggestions for adding to both libraries.
All these projects are a small snapshot of a wide variety of MIL initiatives. Ofcom’s regular bulletin updates (https://
bit.ly/3mf0rud) are a good place to get a fuller impression of what is going on, in the UK and beyond; as is joining MILA’s mailing list at
https://mila.org.uk/contact. So there is some momentum now in developing the evidence base, setting up local educational projects, fostering conversations along with putting in a place – all too slowly – enforceable regulatory mechanisms. But there is still a long way to go before MIL becomes a mainstream topic.
Stéphane Goldstein is Executive Director of InformAll. He is the coordinator for MILA and Advocacy and Outreach Offi cer for CILIP’s Information Literacy Group.
One current limitation is that the thrust of public policy and strategy is protectionist, i.e. enabling defensive measures against online harms, with not enough attention paid to MIL’s empowering potential, that is, the way that it can help foster participation and engagement, including democratic engagement.
Then there is the risk of a further round of austerity in public fi nances; what are the implications of possible budgetary cutbacks on the already modest levels of public investment in ML initiatives? Further causes of uncertainty are the watering down of relevant aspects of the Online Harms Bill; and, following the recent Government reshuffl e, the reorganisation resulting from the transfer of the digital agenda from DCMS to the new Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DCMS remains responsible for media policy and oversight, including Ofcom). Overall, the situation can be summarised as slow progress tempered by caution. IP
1 See Full Fact’s parliamentary briefi ng of 1 February 2023,
https://fullfact.org/media/uploads/parliamentary_briefi ng_-_on- line_safety_bill_-_second_reading_(lords)_-_full_fact_-_01_02_23_-_ website.pdf
2 Further details about the DCMS funded projects at
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/help-for-vulnerable-peo- ple-to-spot-disinformation-and-boost-online-safety
INFORMATION PROFESSIONAL 27
INSIGHT
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
