​

​

​

Hi Reader,

Today's topic is quite unique as I would like to share insights on two vital skills that we, as medical writers, are trained to develop. In light of the challenges presented by our rapidly evolving digital world, it is important to address these skills thoughtfully. I believe that fostering these abilities can benefit everyone, not only in their professional journey but also in their daily life.

In the era of social media and artificial intelligence (AI), information has become both easier to access and more challenging to discern. As someone trained in scientific research, I learned early on that proof does not come from a single data point but a convergence of evidence, tested, replicated, and scrutinized. The same principle applies to navigating today’s digital landscape and controlling the flood of information, where algorithms shape our perceptions, and AI fabrications blur reality.

Biased Algorithms and AI Fabrications

In the current digital landscape, it's clear that many of us depend on social media for news and information. We follow influencers and accounts that align with our interests. It looks like everyone is shopping in their favourite market, which seems fine initially. But are we realizing the issues associated with these digital behaviours?

Social media platforms thrive on engagement, feeding users content that aligns with their existing beliefs. This creates an echo chamber effect, where the same ideas are reinforced, and opposing viewpoints are filtered out. Algorithms don’t just reflect your beliefs; they amplify them. When your feed only shows you content that aligns with your views, it creates a false sense that everyone thinks like you. This suppresses intellectual humility—the awareness that other people can hold differing opinions.

Another issue with social media platforms, despite their promise of open dialogue, is that they often function as modern-day gatekeepers of speech, not through overt censorship, but through algorithmic curation and community moderation that disproportionately silence certain viewpoints. When users flag content as "offensive" or "misinformation," automated systems and human moderators frequently err on the side of removal, particularly for opinions that challenge mainstream narratives, politically contentious claims, or socially progressive orthodoxies. This conflict escalates as users gain the ability to report what they think is offensive content, often doing so based on emotions rather than facts. The result is a digital public square where some ideas are amplified while others are quietly suppressed, not because they’re false, but because they’re inconvenient, controversial, or simply out of step with platform incentives.

AI has made misinformation, deepfakes, synthetic text, and manipulated media even more deceptive. A single viral post, whether true or false, can influence public perception before the facts are verified. How many times have you seen a fake video of a politician, for example, saying something outrageous but tailored to your biases? Without exposure to diverse sources, you’d have no way to fact-check it.

Social media and AI are here to stay, and there is no turning back. So, what can we do to mitigate the risk of fabricated information?

Collective Evidence

In science, we rely on peer review—multiple experts independently verifying findings. Similarly, in the digital world, we must seek the truth by applying the principle of collective evidence. This means gathering multiple lines of evidence that collectively make sense, allowing you to piece them together like a puzzle to see the complete picture. You should also note that evidence varies in terms of the level of detail.

Let me clarify the hierarchy of evidence by providing the following example:

1- You see smoke rising in the distance (indirect evidence). It suggests fire, but could also be mist, dust, or industrial exhaust. [Analogy: A headline or viral post—worth noting, but not proof].

2- You spot the fire itself (direct evidence). Now you have visual confirmation, but still lack full context. Is it controlled? Spreading? [Analogy: Raw footage or primary documents—stronger, but still needing verification].

3- You feel the burn (experiential evidence). The pain removes all doubt; the fire is real and its effects undeniable. [Analogy: replicated studies or direct consequences—the gold standard].

Just as you wouldn’t assume a wildfire from smoke alone, don’t accept digital claims without multiple lines of evidence tested from every angle.

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking skills are more essential than ever in today's digital world. While it can be challenging to teach critical thinking as a distinct subject or curriculum in today's educational system, it's essential to raise awareness about how to address false narratives on social media. The basic education we received in school should now be expanded to include training on how to analyze information effectively and critically.

I don't claim it to be comprehensive, but here is a quick guide on what I think are important steps towards critical thinking in your social media experience:

1- Don’t rely on a single outlet. Compare reports from diverse sources, and try to consume media from opposing viewpoints.

2- Check timing and source. Misinformation often spreads faster than corrections. Ask: When was this posted? Who originally shared it?

3- Look for primary evidence. In conflicts or major events, seek direct footage from people on the ground, official documents, or eyewitness accounts rather than commentary.

4- Question your biases. This last one is very tricky because what we choose to believe or reject can be influenced by our values, cultural perspectives, and religious beliefs. We all have our own biases, but the million-dollar question is: Can we completely eliminate bias?

Can Someone Truly Get Rid of Bias?

Bias is like the lens through which we see the world—it shapes our perceptions without us even realizing it. Insights from the field of social sciences have confirmed that bias cannot be eliminated. Even the desire for objectivity is influenced by our experiences. We’ll never see the world with perfect objectivity, but we can train ourselves to notice when our "glasses" are distorting reality.

Now, suppose you’ve worn red glasses your whole life. You might assume the world itself is red until someone points out that your lenses are tinted. Similarly, our biases (political, cultural, emotional) colour how we interpret news, history, and even personal relationships. The key isn’t to remove bias (impossible) but to compensate for it, like calibrating for a known distortion in a scientific instrument. Truth emerges when we cross-check our perceptions against reality, again and again. I understand that this can be challenging, but being aware of our biases can make a significant difference.

Final Thought: Be a Digital Skeptic

Finding truth in the AI era and social media algorithms requires vigilance. Use collective evidence like a scientist: gather data, test hypotheses, and remain open to revision.

Doubt is healthy. It forces us to seek more evidence before forming conclusions.

As the old adage goes: "A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes."

Next, I will discuss how digital worlds shape the perspectives of children and teenagers, and what parents can do about it.

Until next time, stay curious, stay skeptical!

Thank you for joining the Pen and Parents Newsletter, a resource for freelance medical writers who proudly wear the badge of motherhood! Nisreen Shumayrikh, PhD Find me on Social Media ​​​​

​