Individual (Non) Resilience of University Students to Digital Media Manipulation after COVID-19 (Case Study of Slovak Initiatives)

Abstract

The starting point of this theoretical article is the presentation of the issue of media manipulation in the contemporary digital media environment. The theoretical part is followed by a description and analysis of selected factors that create a belief of the individual’s resilience to digital media manipulative elements. Among the seven researched factors of an individual’s (non) resilience to digital media manipulation, we include: media illiteracy/literacy, thought activity/laziness, searching/not searching for “consensus” in the media, not emphasizing/emphasizing emotions, non-reliance/reliance on own intuition, non-credibility/credibility in the opinion of celebrities and automatic distrust/trust of recipients in the information presented in the media and others. We do not see the presence of manipulative elements in digital media as the main danger (manipulation is always in a sense part of the media message), nor the fact that manipulative elements have an effect on individuals (media—manipulative and non-manipulative—effects cannot be doubted). In our opinion, the very significant risk is the fact that the media message is followed by a false belief of the recipient’s own “immunity” against (covert and overt) media manipulation. The result of this false notion is the individual’s belief that manipulation in digital media content does not “affect” him (“I can easily recognize media manipulation”) and does not “touch” him (“It can’t happen to me”). Such a person then resembles a “house on the sand”, as his opinions, arguments or beliefs quickly collapse under the onslaught of five skills: challenges in the context of media literacy, critical thinking, strategies for verifying the credibility of information sources, the rational assessment of issues and reflection of reality. This original research article is a qualitative analysis of the legacy of ten Slovak educational initiatives focused on the issue of education in the context of media manipulation. The analysis focuses on the role of individual risk factors associated with resilience. The conclusion of the analysis is the elaboration of a positive proposal for the researched issue.

Inside the Bell Jar of Social Media: A Descriptive Study Assessing YouTube Coverage of Psychotropic Medication Adherence

“…Our current global medical health crisis is certainly one of them. Digital health misinformation continues to trend, given the widely permissive and accessible content posted and reviewed by the lay population worldwide [ 34 ]. Taking a more critical constructive lens in examining content to ultimately determine whether it is value laden or driven by science is one potential strategy for demystifying misinformation.…”

Determinants of the happiness of adolescents: A leisure perspective

“…In addition, Roman Kralik (2023) [ 53 ] argued that leisure activities in a variety of environments are helpful to children, the younger generations, and further to the society as a whole, and thus, the free time of young people should be used in a desirable way to positively affect the lives of the young people outside of school. In a similar vein, lack of outdoor activities and interactions offline due to the increased use of the Internet along with the implementation of online classes during the COVID-19 pandemic caused lack of well-being, loss of activity and vitality, and an increase of stress among students and the younger generations of recent days, which might imply the importance of physical activities and interactions offline for the young people [ 54 ].…”

Digital resilience in Chinese adolescents: a portrayal of the current condition, influencing factors, and improvement strategies

“…Reviewing the literature showed several areas for improvement in the research related to digital resilience. First of all, current research on digital resilience mainly focuses on children (13)(14)(15), elementary school students (14), college students (5,8,(16)(17)(18), minority youth (19), consumers (20), and professionals (21), to name a few. In contrast, relatively little research has been conducted on adolescents in the middle and high school cohorts as a high online risk group.…”