How good are we with critical thinking?

We've been talking recently about the importance of critical thinking. I was surprised to have a conversation with my parents recently, who were not aware that the original meaning of "woke" came from those fighting for racial justice. They gave me a populist definition of it. They were quite shocked that they and other people had got it so wrong, and it was a powerful moment of reflection for them. They felt compelled to pass it on to anyone else who didn't understand.

It got us thinking about how much news and reporting people accept without applying any critical thinking to it. I suspect this is true for alot of people - in our communities and workplaces - because bias and supremacist world views are everywhere, and unless you're paying attention to them, and are actively questioning and bringing curiosity to them, you won't see them.

For instance, we ran a check on the reporting by Western media about Iran and Israel over the weekend via ChatGPT, prompting it to consider this through the lens of the white supremacy traits, and these are some of the ways that it says bias is at play.

Perfectionism:
Media narratives often portrayed U.S. and Israeli military actions as precise and successful, with little acknowledgement of potential errors or civilian casualties.

Sense of Urgency:
Reports emphasised immediate threats posed by Iran’s nuclear program, justifying swift military responses and downplaying diplomatic alternatives.

Defensiveness:
Criticism of U.S. and Israeli actions was often met with justifications centred on national security, portraying any dissent as unpatriotic or naive.

Quantity Over Quality:
Coverage focused on the number of targets hit and missiles launched, with less attention to the conflict's human impact or long-term consequences.

Worship of the Written Word:
Official statements and press releases from government and military sources were often presented without critical analysis, lending authority to their narratives.

Only One Right Way:
The framing suggested that military action was the sole viable solution to the perceived threat, marginalising voices advocating for diplomacy or alternative approaches.

Paternalism:
Western media often depicted Iran as needing guidance or correction, reinforcing a dynamic where Western powers are seen as arbiters of acceptable behaviour.

Power Hoarding:
The dominance of U.S. and Israeli perspectives in reporting limited the inclusion of Iranian viewpoints or those of other affected populations.

Individualism:
The focus on key figures, such as President Trump or Prime Minister Netanyahu, overshadowed collective movements or the experiences of ordinary citizens affected by the conflict.

Progress is Bigger, More:
Success was often measured by the scale of military operations or the extent of damage inflicted, rather than progress toward peace or stability.

Myth of Objectivity:
Claims of unbiased reporting were undermined by the selective presentation of facts and reliance on official sources, which may carry inherent biases.

Stay woke, folks.