Ensuring that information being shared is coming from a valid and reliable source has always been crucial. But for many, this hasn’t been especially important for a variety of factors—it’s easy to believe what’s posted if the person posting is one you generally trust; some information being shared feels intuitive and thus is likely not wrong (or if it is wrong, it won’t cause actual harm); media literacy skills are generally not a cultural strong suit; and, frankly, not caring for any number of reasons.
But in an era where our information is continuing to be skewed by those with power, it is well beyond time to begin asking questions about the information you’re reading. We know that we can no longer rely on some of the basic media literacy skills once taught. Websites with a .gov address after them are no longer going to provide the breadth and depth of information they once did. With one executive order, any and all history related to trans people in America has been erased.
Turning to the 5Ws, 1H, and TOADSRIG, as outlined in this piece, can be helpful tools for navigating information you’re presented. But how do you begin to even assess whether the information is worth assessing? You have to begin with the source of that information.
It’s your responsibility to explore whether information is reliable and whether it is valid. These are two separate, but related, concepts. Reliability is about consistency. With information, reliability applies to whether what you’re reading is consistent across sources. There will certainly be differences in slant, but at heart, the information being shared is the same from outlet to outlet. Validity is about accuracy. With information, validity is about where something falls on the spectrum of fact to fiction.
Here’s an example.
In mid-February, several social media accounts began to post about a “radical U-turn” being made by the Trump administration regarding vaccines. These posts were nearly all worded the same, but they were being posted on Facebook, on Instagram, and X, among other places.
The Frontenno Instagram account doesn’t have a blue checkmark—ultimately a meaningless symbol, as we’ll get to shortly—but it is a “news and media” account with over 63,000 followers. The caption includes a link to a Daily Mail story at the bottom.
Another post came from an X account called Outbreak Updates. That account, which pays for a blue checkmark to look like it is authoritative, had a lot of engagement on its post. There is nothing linked to the thread and no sources listed as to where the information came from.
These posts showed up in anti-vaccine groups as proof of their beliefs, just as much as they showed up in progressive groups that have long advocated for vaccination. Most of those posts came with no additional information—the above-posted social post on Instagram was rare in sharing a link.
And it’s that link where we need to be spending a little more time before choosing to share the message.
The story emerged in The Daily Mail. The first thing to do is consider the source. What is The Daily Mail, where is it located, and what kind of news do they provide? This is very easy to find. The Daily Mail is a conservative tabloid based in London. All of the social shares for this story used the same few words from the headline: “Radical U-turn.” This suggests that first, they’re not actual news sources themselves, and second, they’re all citing the same single source, that Daily Mail piece.
Then we turn to the social media accounts sharing this information. What can we learn about them? The Instagram account isn’t an American-based source, and English is not its primary language of communication with followers. It’s Norwegian. What vested interest do they have in sharing American-based news with American readers? The answer is little. That’s not to say they don’t have a reason for sharing said news—plenty of their followers have an interest, and the affairs in America directly impact those globally—but they would be far from a first source for news.
The second account on X, Outbreak Updates, looks to share a lot of information about public health concerns. But their bio offers absolutely nothing to indicate they have much authority or expertise in the area. It simply reads “Latest reports. Don’t hesitate to DM me about interesting stories.” Who is this “me?” We don’t know. A look through their timeline showcases the same kind of cut-and-paste sharing as the example above. Lots of decontextualized information without links to original sources. What the account wants you to do is take their word as truth without giving credit or offering sources to back up the statements. No matter how factually correct the information may be, you, as a consumer, are not given sources to independently verify and assess.
At this point, a critical consumer of news knows they need to do some research to see what other outlets are talking about this topic.
A search for a variety of keywords related to the story—vaccine bans, Kennedy vaccine ban, US vaccine ban, vaccine ban Trump administration—brings up absolutely nothing in addition to the Daily Mail story. The original story is either cited by or copy-pasted in other outlets, such as MSN.
The lack of coverage from other outlets should send a big red flag.
So what now?
If you’ve seen this story online, ask the person sharing it to share a link which talks about the topic. This can be done really nicely, especially in a private group or with a friend or loved one. “Hey, do you happen to have a link to a story about this?” or “I tried finding a link to a story about this but am having trouble. Do you have one?” You should not simply accept what’s being told to you, no matter how much you think it sounds true. Often in situations of mis- and dis- information, the person who shared the information can’t provide a resource because their resource is the social post without an attached source. This is one reason why the reliance on TikTok for news, especially in younger demographics, is deeply concerning. Without provided sources or citations, information is decontextualized and easy to use in order to manipulate people into doing, acting, or feeling a certain way.
By asking them to cite a source, you’re not only doing a favor to yourself, but you’re doing a favor to anyone else who may be seeing said post.
These headlines and calls to action of sharing the message are playing on your sense of fear. They are misinformation. The headline is close enough to the truth to feel right—we know Kennedy’s stance on vaccines very well—but it’s a lie because nothing of the sort has actually been said or suggested. Like with the Department of Education press release, this story is intended to reach both the left and the right. The first in order to create outrage. The second, to confirm bias.
We should be angry right now. We should be frustrated. We should be scared. Four+ years of talking about the realities of being a marginalized person when it comes to books being banned is the same reality that appears in every other area of public life. But falling for headlines like these and stoking that rage does no favors for anyone. It is the quickest way to burnout and to despair, which are two things that will not help protect the lives of those most vulnerable right now.
In an era where book censorship continues to grow and where people have found they can get some social media clout or good traffic by writing about book banning, it’s vital to understand not all of this information is true. It takes a lot of time, energy, and effort to track down the truth and to verify the source of claims being mad about censorship.
Book Censorship News: March 7, 2025
- Huntsville-Madison County Public Library (AL) has implemented a new level of library card access that denies young people wide swaths of material without parental permission. Remember: leveled cards like this are both censorship and a significant liability for the library.
- After a year of fighting over the made-up “naughty books” in Corpus Christi Public Library (TX), the library will now be creating two separate sections: a teen section, for books appropriate to readers ages 13-18, and a “young adult” section, for books appropriate to readers 18-25. This is…not only not standard, the level of detail about what sexual content does and does not fit in either says far more about the folks making the decision than anything else. This is a PUBLIC LIBRARY.
- Residents in Huntington Beach, California, including two teenagers, are suing over book censorship in the public library. The ongoing battle in Huntington Beach has been in play now for a couple of years, and now, with California’s new Right to Read law, the actions taken by the city council against the library may be against the law.
- More from Huntington: residents will vote on book banning in June.
- In Lubbock Independent School District (TX), one parent complained about the children’s book Bathe the Cat by Alice B. McGinty because it includes an image of a same-sex couple. The school is not banning the book.
- This story is paywalled, but expect a lawsuit against Rutherford Schools (TN) over their outrageous book banning.
- Radnor High School (PA) banned three books after a parental complaint. The books are Gender Queer, Fun Home, and Blankets.
- A reminder that book banning is alive and well in Canada, too.
- Missouri legislators, among those who’ve been at the forefront of the book banning/inappropriate book moral panic, now want to take up a bill that would allow parents to sue library board members over books they deem inappropriate. This would make book banning via the library board much, much, MUCH more pervasive.
- “Since the last Board of Education meeting, school leaders said they have received roughly 200 messages — 84 of which were reviewed by the district’s legal counsel and found to contain language deemed discriminatory, racist, homophobic or threatening.” This is Pennfield Central School District in New York, where at the last meeting, the bigots showed up in force over a picture book they deemed explicit. This included one racist showing up in a gorilla costume. Now they’re just sending the district threats and as a result, board meetings are being canceled. Do….these people seem like the type to be deciding what kids have access to?
- Oh, so one of the library board members trying to defund the Washoe County Library System (NV) was getting money from an anti-LGBTQ+ group? Color me shocked.
- Parents in Ohio, including at least one who doesn’t even have kids in the district at hand, complained about the social studies curriculum to be passed at Forest Hills School to be “biased” against Trump. Nice use of the same rhetoric used by their cult leader about it. The curriculum passed.
- Vigo County School Board (IN) heard a single complaint by a parent about the use of The Hate U Give as part of high school curriculum, and now the book is under review.
- A federal judge told Florida state officials they can’t wiggle out of the lawsuit brought upon them over their book banning law.
- Remember the years-long battle going on over Samuels Public Library (VA) which began over a small number of churchgoers being mad about books in the library, getting the county involved, and now the county has installed its own review board to override the board that actually oversees the library? Now that county board is suggesting the library will be defunded. Anyone with eyes on this story saw this coming from miles away. This is going to be the future of so many PUBLIC libraries—they’ll be controlled by the radical Christian right, not by the public. More here. Previously, here.
- Campbell County Public Library (WY) will begin their plan to further undermine the professional skills and credentials of their employees. “[T]he changes to the library’s collection development policy removed language listing requirements from distributors as well as language requiring the use of select secondary sources (such as Booklist, Library Journal, and Publishers Weekly) meant to determine a book’s suitability for the collection.”
- Whoever is appointed to the Alpena Public Library (MI) will have a tremendous impact on the future of this beleaguered public library.
- Stillwater, Minnesota, schools have pulled several books that were donated to the school and are making them accessible to kids with permission slips only. Yes, the books have LGBTQ+ characters.
- In Douglas County, Colorado, county commissioners decided not to follow the traditional route of how library trustees are appointed and in doing so, elected to appoint a pro-book banner to the library board.
- Meeker Public Regional Library Board (CO) heard from residents who were angry about where Gender Queer was located in the library. Here’s the thing that will surprise no one paying attention: the book they claimed was in the youth section but it’s actually not. It’s another lie to push a manufactured panic.
