Lightning Talk #139 Including youth to the public discourse

Summary

This panel discussion focused on how Norwegian media organizations are working to include youth in public discourse and combat misinformation in the digital age. The session featured three speakers from different Norwegian media initiatives who shared their strategies for engaging young people with reliable news and media literacy education.

Sølve Kuraas Karlsen from TENK, the media literacy department at Faktisk.no, explained how their fact-checking organization recognized the need to connect with schools through teachers rather than just journalists. TENK creates lesson plans tied to current events and trending social media topics, teaching students skills like reverse image searches to verify AI-generated content and understand the narratives behind visual information. They work with libraries, teachers, and other partners to reach young people where they are, including on TikTok, emphasizing that adults need to be present in these spaces as conversation partners rather than surveillance figures.

Katarina Juni Moneta, a former influencer turned journalist at NRK (Norwegian national broadcaster), shared her personal experience of how algorithms shaped her content creation and personality online. She described how the pursuit of likes and engagement led to increasingly exaggerated presentations and potentially addictive behaviors. Now working in journalism, she creates explainer videos for young adults while acknowledging both the dangers and democratic value of social media platforms, arguing that responsible news organizations must maintain a presence on these platforms to reach younger audiences.

Ada Bjøranger from Fæven Ung presented their local newspaper’s youth project, which provides free digital subscriptions to high school students while sending journalists into classrooms to explain their work and encourage civic participation. The project combines targeted youth journalism covering topics like school cafeterias and graduation celebrations with hands-on media literacy education and debate exercises. The initiative has reached thousands of students and published 150 youth opinion pieces, with the model now spreading to other Norwegian newspapers as a sustainable approach to rebuilding trust between young people and traditional journalism.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **Media literacy education for youth in the digital age**: The panelists discussed how traditional media consumption has shifted to social media platforms like TikTok and Snapchat, requiring new approaches to teach young people how to navigate information, identify reliable sources, and understand the context behind what they see online.

– **The influence of algorithms on content creation and consumption**: Katarina shared her personal experience as a former influencer, explaining how social media algorithms push creators toward more extreme, sensational content to gain engagement, and how this creates echo chambers that can polarize public discourse and shape worldviews.

– **Challenges of misinformation and AI-generated content**: The discussion covered how young people struggle to identify fake news, manipulated videos, and AI-generated images, particularly during major events like wars or elections, and the need to teach verification tools like reverse image searches.

– **Engaging youth in journalism and public discourse**: Ada presented their newspaper’s approach of providing free subscriptions to high school students and visiting classrooms to teach about journalism, encouraging young people to participate in debates and write opinion pieces on issues that matter to them.

– **Balancing presence on social media platforms with editorial responsibility**: The panelists discussed the dilemma of whether established media organizations should engage on platforms like TikTok to reach young audiences, despite concerns about algorithmic manipulation and the need to maintain journalistic standards.

## Overall Purpose:

The discussion aimed to share Norwegian approaches to media literacy education and youth engagement in journalism, presenting practical solutions for helping young people navigate the complex digital information landscape while encouraging their participation in democratic discourse.

## Overall Tone:

The tone was constructive and solution-oriented throughout, with the panelists sharing practical experiences and strategies rather than simply criticizing social media or young people’s media habits. The speakers maintained a collaborative, educational approach, acknowledging both the challenges and opportunities presented by digital platforms, and emphasizing the importance of meeting young people where they are rather than dismissing their preferred communication channels.

Speakers

**Speakers from the provided list:**

– **Solve Kuraas Karlsen** – Head of Education and Media Literacy at TENK, which is the Media Literacy Department at Faktisk.no (a fact-checking organization in Norway)

– **Katarina Juni Moneta** – Former influencer (100,000+ followers during pandemic), currently a journalist at NRK (Norwegian national broadcaster) working in the news department making explainer videos for young adults aged 17-30

– **Ada Bjoranger** – Journalist at Fæven Ung (Fæven Young), working on a project providing high school students with digital newspaper subscriptions and conducting classroom visits to teach about journalism

– **Audience** – Multiple audience members asking questions, including:

– Fiorella Ferrari from Peru (works on ensuring safe access to information and technology)

– An individual from Geneva doing sensitization work

– Johnny Erlings from the Dutch Ministry of Justice

**Additional speakers:**

None identified beyond those in the speakers names list.

# Youth Media Literacy and Democratic Participation in the Digital Age: A Norwegian Perspective

## Executive Summary

This panel discussion featured three Norwegian media professionals presenting distinct approaches to youth engagement and media literacy in the digital age. The session included representatives from fact-checking organisation Faktisk.no, national broadcaster NRK, and regional newspaper Fæven, each sharing their strategies for connecting with young audiences and combating misinformation. While presented as separate initiatives rather than a coordinated strategy, the presentations revealed common themes around meeting young people on social media platforms and providing them with tools for informed democratic participation.

## Speaker Presentations and Initiatives

### TENK’s Educational Approach to Media Literacy

Solve Kuraas Karlsen, Head of Education and Media Literacy at TENK (the Media Literacy Department at Faktisk.no), described his organisation’s evolution from traditional fact-checking to comprehensive media literacy education. TENK, established in 2019 as part of Faktisk.no (founded in 2017), recognised that producing fact-checks alone was insufficient—they needed to connect directly with schools through teachers rather than relying solely on journalists to reach young audiences.

The organisation creates lesson plans tied to current events and trending social media topics, teaching students practical verification skills such as reverse image searches to identify AI-generated content. Karlsen provided specific examples of misinformation challenges, including a photo from Ukraine that actually showed a drama teacher, AI-generated images of celebrities at the Met Gala, and edited political videos. He emphasised teaching students to understand the narratives behind visual information, particularly as young people increasingly consume news through platforms like TikTok and Snapchat.

TENK’s approach involves building alliances with librarians, teachers, and social workers, recognising that no single organisation can address media literacy challenges alone. They also operate a “Quest for the Truth” traveling library exhibition. Karlsen stressed the importance of engaging with young people “at eye height” and in their own language, understanding what matters to them rather than imposing adult priorities. He used the analogy of a “home alone party” to illustrate why adult supervision and guidance are needed in online spaces.

### From Influencer to Journalist: Understanding Algorithmic Influence

Katarina Juni Moneta brought a unique perspective as a former influencer with over 100,000 followers during the pandemic who transitioned to journalism at NRK’s news department, where she now creates explainer videos for young adults aged 17-30. Her personal experience provided insights into how social media algorithms shape both content creators and consumers.

Moneta described how her “online persona became a sort of character in the TikTok matrix”—an amplified version of herself that developed in response to algorithmic rewards. She explained how the pursuit of likes and engagement led to increasingly exaggerated presentations, creating potentially addictive behaviours and distorting authentic self-expression. This algorithmic influence, she argued, pushes creators toward more extreme and sensational content, contributing to polarised public discourse.

Despite these concerns, Moneta advocated for responsible media organisations maintaining a presence on social platforms. She argued that TikTok serves as an important news source for young people and that established media must offer “trust, clarity, and context in a chaotic media landscape” rather than abandoning these spaces to unverified influencers. Her transition to journalism was motivated by a desire to provide more substantive content while still engaging young audiences on their preferred platforms.

### Local Journalism’s Youth Engagement Model

Ada Bjoranger from Fæven Ung presented their regional newspaper’s comprehensive youth project, which combines free digital subscriptions for high school students with targeted content creation and classroom visits. The initiative provides all high school students in their area with access to quality journalism while creating content that features young people as primary sources in stories that affect them.

The project has achieved significant reach: out of over 5,000 total students, 3,380 created accounts for the digital subscriptions. They have conducted 170 introduction courses and published 150 youth opinion pieces. The approach challenges traditional news hierarchies by covering topics relevant to youth daily life, such as school cafeterias and graduation celebrations. Bjoranger emphasised that “it’s not only about asking the youth to participate in the articles we normally write” but about covering topics that matter in their lives.

Classroom visits form a crucial component of the programme, with journalists explaining their work and encouraging participation in public debate through interactive exercises. The model has proven successful enough that other Norwegian newspapers are now adopting similar approaches, suggesting its potential as a sustainable method for rebuilding trust between young people and traditional journalism.

## Common Themes Across Presentations

### Platform Engagement Strategy

All three speakers addressed the reality that young people’s media consumption has shifted to social media platforms, requiring media organisations and educators to engage on these platforms despite their problems. Each presenter described strategies for maintaining editorial standards while competing for attention in algorithm-driven environments.

### Direct Educational Engagement

Both Karlsen and Bjoranger emphasised that media literacy requires direct, personal engagement through classroom visits and workshops, not just digital outreach. This hands-on approach appears central to building trust and understanding between media professionals and young people.

### Youth-Centred Content Approach

The speakers described covering topics that might seem trivial to adults but resonate with young audiences. This represents a shift from traditional news values toward content that connects with youth experiences and interests.

## Challenges and Complexities

### Algorithmic Influence and Democratic Implications

The presentations explored how social media algorithms create problematic incentives for content creation. Moneta’s testimony illustrated how algorithms reward extreme and sensational content, pushing creators to exaggerate their personalities and views to gain engagement. This creates cycles where the pursuit of likes becomes addictive, potentially distorting both individual expression and broader public discourse.

The speakers identified a trust gap where young people often trust individual influencers more than established media outlets, giving unqualified content creators significant influence over public opinion. This raised questions about democratic participation when young people spend more time listening to influencers than to journalists and politicians.

### Information Verification in the AI Era

The panel addressed the increasing difficulty of identifying AI-generated content, including fake images of celebrities and manipulated political videos. Karlsen highlighted how disinformation campaigns using old footage or manipulated content can make people vulnerable to believing nothing is true, particularly during emotionally charged events like wars. This challenge requires teaching practical verification tools while helping young people understand broader context.

### Balancing Platform Engagement with Editorial Responsibility

The speakers grappled with maintaining presence on platforms like TikTok to reach young audiences while preserving journalistic standards and avoiding algorithmic manipulation. This tension reflects broader questions about how established media organisations can compete with influencers while maintaining credibility.

## Audience Engagement and Questions

The discussion generated several important questions highlighting ongoing challenges. Johnny Erlings from the Dutch Ministry of Justice raised concerns about prioritising content and deciding what news to share with young audiences, given overwhelming information volumes and limited resources.

Fiorella Ferrari from Peru asked about strategies for preventing online violence against content creators, particularly women, in the context of Peru’s electoral processes where social media attacks are used to silence voices. This highlighted how safety concerns vary significantly across cultural contexts.

An audience member from Geneva explored whether media literacy interventions are equally effective across different socioeconomic groups, noting that approaches might work better in affluent schools while being most needed in disadvantaged communities.

These questions revealed unresolved issues extending beyond the Norwegian context, including how to help students who view the internet purely as entertainment understand it as a space for political discussion, and how to measure long-term impact on democratic participation.

## Implications and Future Directions

The presentations offered practical approaches to youth media literacy that avoid both dismissing social media and naively accepting its risks. The Norwegian examples suggest that effective youth engagement requires sustained investment, innovative approaches, and genuine respect for young people’s perspectives.

The emphasis on collaborative approaches—involving teachers, librarians, social workers, and journalists working together—provides a framework adaptable to different contexts. The focus on practical tools and real-time education connected to current events offers a dynamic model for keeping media literacy relevant.

As Karlsen noted, there is “no silver bullet” for these challenges, but the Norwegian initiatives demonstrate various cooperative approaches that acknowledge the complexity of digital information landscapes while working constructively within them.

## Conclusion

This panel showcased how Norwegian media organisations are developing youth-centred approaches to media literacy and democratic engagement. The speakers’ commitment to meeting young people where they are, combined with emphasis on direct engagement and respect for youth perspectives, offers valuable insights for addressing information literacy challenges in the digital age.

The presentations’ significance extends beyond practical recommendations to their philosophical approach: treating young people as partners in democratic discourse rather than passive recipients of adult wisdom. While acknowledging unresolved challenges—from online safety to socioeconomic disparities—the Norwegian experience provides concrete examples of initiatives that work within problematic digital systems rather than abandoning young audiences to navigate them alone.

These approaches offer valuable insights for media literacy practitioners globally, while the acknowledgement of ongoing challenges demonstrates the need for continued innovation and adaptation in rapidly changing digital environments.

Solve Kuraas Karlsen: Tito Duarte, as Michelle Waterhouse The Past vs. Present The Future vs. the Present Welcome to this panel. My name is Sølve, and I’m Head of Education and Media Literacy at TENK, which is the Media Literacy Department at Faktisk.no. I’m together here with two of my colleagues, two other projects, and we are going to present for you how we work in Norway to include youth into public discourse. And first of all, it’s important for me to say that this is no silver bullet. It is cooperations together with different initiatives, and these are some of the examples we will bring forward to you. Faktisk was a fact-checking organization established in Norway in 2017, and shortly after that we saw there was a huge need in schools to have media literacy, and those who were working with fact-checking were journalists. And we saw the need of being more connected to schools as well, so all who work in TENK, which is the department I’m head of, are teachers. So we know how to talk to kids and young people, and we see the need of connecting media outlets and media information to the classroom as well. So we started in 2019 with TENK, developing learning resources and connected to the curriculum in Norway, and we are really close connected to news that is published all day. We know that from my age, we started with this editorial media, which was usually, but we see more and more today that we have those social media, and the information is coming rapidly to young people, and often it’s really short, and it’s maybe not that balanced as media could be. And the challenge is to show young people that when you’re on TikTok or other social media, you need to know the rules, what is happening there. Now we’re recording. Now. We also see that a lot of young people have a hard time finding the source of the information. Many times it could be that way that they just don’t know that they have been watching news or watching information. We also see on other social media, for example, Snapchat here, that different sources are connected, and then you ended up, you don’t know what kind of sources you are using, and you can’t tell the difference from them, that you might have some sources that could be reliable, but other sources that might have an interest behind the information. What we saw in Norway, what is happening more and more, is that young people, they are using social media. This graph shows what kind of social media they are using, and what we see is that the feed is getting more and more visual. It’s not text the way it used to be. In that way, it’s not that easy to fact check it, and often it’s not right or wrong, it’s more that you need to know the narrative behind it. And also what we see is that a lot of young people also get their news from social media as well. So in that way, we have to understand that we cannot go with a pointing finger and tell young people, you need to stay away from social media. We need to educate them so they understand the rules where they are meeting the information. This is an example just before the war started in the Middle East, after the 7th of October attacks, and we saw a lot of videos sharing this saying that the war has started, that Israel has invaded Gaza. But this was videos that were shared online, and it was actually a couple of years ago. But in social media, you don’t see this, and for a lot of people that are sharing this, they don’t know that this is old videos. In this way, you need to talk with young people and tell them, okay, where do you get your information from? Also when you’re talking about social media, and you need to understand that there’s different accounts you have to check, then you can tell what kind of information it is and if it is reliable. We know that feelings are really strong in the news landscape we see today. This was one of the first photos that was published in Norway after the Russian invasion in 2022. It was this lady who stands in front of her house telling that the Russian has bombed her. Soon after, this post was posted on X asking, could this be really true? This woman was bombed back in 2018 as well. It was really strange. She was a drama teacher. Someone says maybe she’s an influencer, and this way of making questions towards news and information is really effective, and it could be hard for young people to understand if this is true or not. And then you end up that nothing can be true, and then you’re really vulnerable for disinformation. But it’s not only war that can be a challenge. This one is a video from the Met Gala last year showing what is going on in New York where all the celebrities were gathered to show some trends. The challenger’s actress first hit the carpet in this black and blue striped gown by Maison Margiela. The look totally nailed the Garden of Time theme with its grapes, feathers and hummingbird accents. So besides this, it’s really clear that she might have some back problems. You can see the tone, you see how it looks like, and then you don’t hassle at all when you see these pictures showing Selena Gomez wearing this dress or Rihanna wearing this one. Although I’ve been growing up in the northern part of Norway, so if she’d go out in this dress in the sea, she would probably get far away up in the ocean. But anyway, and this dress also totally nailed the carpet as well, but none of them were at the Met Gala. These are all pictures created by AI. And young people don’t understand this. And we know that among young people and on social media, click and sharing are as money. We have to remember this one. And often we forget that we need also to address those challenges that young people meet, not only 45 white men. This video was shared before that they have shared what kind of support they have in political opinions in the US. It is also edited by AI. But young people don’t know how to do this, so we need to show them the tools. How can we verify pictures and videos when you don’t know if it’s real or not? So we need to show them the tools. But young people don’t know how to do this, so we need to show them the tools. How can we verify pictures and videos when you don’t know if it’s true or not? That’s why we are traveling around to schools in Norway, also sharing lesson plans online, learning them how to do reverse image search. This is quite easy to do, but if you haven’t heard of it, you can’t do it. And this way you can maneuver the information landscape and find the correct video and know the context it’s made in. So then you know how to get the correct information, because a vital part of having free speech is getting the correct information. And if you should get the correct information, you need to have the tools. And then you can find that this is the original video, how it was made. She didn’t have a Trump banner at all. But when we are talking about AI, it’s not only the pictures and the video, it’s also the AI bots. And for young people, we know that it’s easy to open yourself to a bot, because that’s not the person that makes you embarrassed. The problem is who is listening on the other side. And even though you know they are AI, you kind of forget that. So when all your friends on Snapchat have gone to bed, and you’re sharing all your inner thoughts, that will be shared and remembered forever. And what will happen the next time you have troubles and your information is shared for someone who wants to make money? on your feelings. What we do in TENC is we are creating lesson plans that is answering to the news as it happens. So after the Ukraine war started in 2022, we were with lesson plans three days after the invasion. We also address social trends on social media, like this, what I eat in a day. We also created lesson plans to those as well, because those trends might be challenging for young people when they don’t know what is behind the trend and how does it work. We also need to build knowledge about, for example, AI. This is a package where we learn young people how they can, what is behind AI, because there’s a lot of young people in Norway that are using AI for schoolwork, for different tasks they’re doing in their everyday life, but what’s behind and how it works, they don’t know, because we haven’t created stuff yet. And we say, okay, when everything is done, we will create something. So we need to create stuff that might lose the date sooner or later, but we need to go out there and show them the AI pictures, the AI movies, and so on. We also work with librarians as well. This is Quest for the Truth, it’s called, and it’s traveling around to libraries in Norway. And we at TENC, we can change the examples on those screens. So all the time, this is an updated exhibition that librarians can invite young people to the library and show, okay, here you can learn the last news, here you can learn some new techniques. Those stations have like reverse image search, how to spot AI, how to understand algorithms, and so on. Because we have to remember, there’s only no, we can’t be the only one who’s sharing this information. We need to build an alliance together with others, like librarians, like social workers, teachers, and so on. So all the time we are sharing, and also we are cooperating with different other projects in the media. Here is a workshop with the teachers at the school in Norway, and all the time we are publishing lesson plans on our website, tenc.faktisk.no. And we are also having visitors from schools, teachers, and so on at our office in Oslo. And we also have our TikTok account where we share knowledge, so young people can reach us straight through their social media, because there needs to be adults in the room. And we know by research that young people want adults to be with them, not as a surveillance, but more like a talking partner. And you don’t need to actually be a really cool TikTok teacher. You need to open the conversation and share your knowledge, so then you can meet the young ones. Because we have to remember, if there’s a home alone party, we everyone know how it looks like when we come home. My name is Katarina, and I used to be an influencer. I started posting TikTok

Katarina Juni Moneta: videos and YouTube videos during the pandemic, and my audience quickly grew to a bit more than 100,000 people. I posted fun fact videos in Norwegian every single week. And I spent a lot of time working out how to adapt my content to the TikTok algorithm to maximize my likes, my views, and my shares. Today, I am a journalist, and I work in the NRK, the Norwegian national broadcaster. And I work in the news department, and I make explainer videos for young adults. And in my current role, I often reflect on how I shaped my content to fit the algorithm when I was an influencer. Because when we talk about social media today, we quickly arrive at the topic of polarization. Extreme views get the most engagement on social media. Creators who shock us or entertain us or scare us or surprise us, they get the most views. And maybe that’s because the algorithms that are designed to give the users what they want actually end up making creators more extreme in their presentation or in their views or in the way they express themselves or even in their beliefs. When I was making content on TikTok, I quickly realized that I had to amplify and exaggerate my facial expressions, for example, to get more views. And I got more views if I presented my content in a more shocking way or a more sensational way than I would normally do. So my online persona became a sort of character in the TikTok matrix. It was still me, but it was an amplified version of me. And why did that happen? Well, because it worked. It got me likes, it got me engagement, and it got me followers. People wanted that larger-than-life storytelling and interesting content. And so I continued to shape my content to fit the algorithm. And in that way, the algorithm shaped me. Parts of my personality were still in my content, but a very enhanced part. And I didn’t even realize that that was what was happening when I was making content. On social media now, this type of content isn’t necessarily the type of content that would be doing very well. Now, the trends are more authentic content rather than this larger-than-life content that worked a few years ago. But that’s the thing. The trends, they change really quickly, but so do the content creators. They are very, very good at adapting their content. And it might not be like this for every content creator, but for me, getting thousands of likes and comments and new followers every week became addicting. Opening my mobile phone and having thousands of people praise me, it definitely stimulated some sort of reward center in my brain. And when that’s taken away, or when you get less likes than you expected, that feels very disappointing. And it might even feel really stressful. And adding the layer of earning money on all this as well, well, it’s really easy to start chasing the likes. And then it’s really easy to start adapting your content to whatever works. And that is an addiction. So how does this attention addiction affect how content creators make their content? Maybe the hunt for online recognition isn’t that harmful. Maybe it just makes the content more energetic or colorful or creative. Maybe it’s not a problem that I changed the tone of my voice or that I exaggerated my facial expressions. Maybe it’s not a problem that I added elements of surprise or humor or did everything I could to get my message across in a way that stimulated the algorithm. But what if the algorithms push people to exaggerate their political views or their personal beliefs or their religious thoughts? What if you gain more followers by provoking a little or by being controversial? What if the content comment section explodes every time you offend someone? What if altering your own views give you more likes or when lying gives you attention? How does it change us? What happens to public discourse when we have this reward system? We might get influenced by more extreme views and we might get the impression that these views are the norm. The middle ground shrinks and we might feel like we disagree with people much more than we in reality do. We all have our own feeds and our own individual understanding of what’s going on and our worldviews are in many ways shaped by what the algorithm chooses to show us on these platforms and by who we choose to trust. Unlike editor-led media where editors hopefully try to be balanced with what they present, the algorithms on social media are often tuned to just give us more of what we already like. So if I like football content I might have a lot of football content in my feed and if I like Andrew Tate well I might get a lot of his content in my feed but I might never be exposed to alternative viewpoints or hear the other side of the story. That leads to echo chambers where people’s viewpoints become As an influencer, I experienced firsthand how easy it is to gain people’s trust online. I was a 20-something-year-old living in a one-room apartment. I had no academic background, but I was making fact videos, and people trusted me. People followed me, and they became attached to me and my TikTok persona, and nobody was fact-checking what I was doing. Most of my followers were young. I had thousands of comments and hundreds of thousands of likes. I had many more teens viewing my content than many of the big Norwegian outlets had at the time, big Norwegian news outlets had at the time. And what I said, just as a private person, was often just accepted as the truth. That’s a huge responsibility for one individual, and that’s a responsibility that many content creators carry. So what happens to democracy when young people spend more time listening to influencers than to journalists and politicians? Who do we trust, and how does this shape our elections or our ability to collectively act during crisis? We can’t rely on people getting important information from influencers who again rely on their content being spread by big private tech companies. We just don’t know enough about how these algorithms work, and we might not notice when these algorithms change. It might feel like the content we see on these platforms is organic, but it’s not. It’s owned and it’s controlled by big private tech companies. We noticed the changes when Twitter became X and when Elon Musk made some drastic alterations, but what if similar shifts happen gradually and over time on other platforms? How will we notice that we are being shaped by the content? How would we notice that when we’re all already viewing different content? I ultimately made the conscious decision to leave the influencer world and to join a national news broadcaster, as I was and I still am concerned about what happens if trust in editor-led media declines. In my job in NRK now, we try to find ways to meet young people’s needs online. They want a lot of the same as adults do. They want to know about wars, they want to know about politics, but they want it delivered in a different way and they want it on different platforms. And my job in NRK now as a journalist is to make short format explainer videos for young adults. Our target audience is people between the ages of 17 and 30. And me and my colleague Ole, we make videos every week explaining all sorts of various topics in the news or current events. We make videos about Gaza, about taxes, about elections, but also about dating and plastic surgery and other trending topics. When something big happens, we are quick and we get an explainer video out within hours. We want to make complex things easier for young people to understand. We want to be constructive and give them context and we want to make it easy for them to follow the rest of the news covering. We publish videos mainly on our front page, NRK.no, but we also film them so that we can publish them on TV, on radio and on social media. And when we publish videos on social media, our main goal is to let our target audience know that we exist. We have to accept that the media landscape has changed. The infinite flow of information is the new normal, whether we like it or not. And we still need to reach young people with safe and constructive and fact-based news. And they need to know and understand the difference between an influencer and editor-led media. And that’s why we need to have two thoughts in our minds at the same time. Because even though there are good reasons to be aware of the shadow sides, we must not ignore the good sides of social media. People can speak out, build communities, stay connected, they can learn and they can experience and express themselves in ways that were not possible before. This is especially important for many young people. And there is a lot of value in having the opportunity to share your views without having to go through editor-led media first. For many people, a TikTok video or a Snapchat story is their way of participating in democracy. And we must not underestimate how important that is. TikTok is an important news source for young people. And for many under 20, it is the most important news source. NRK, where I work now, has made the decision to start posting news stories on TikTok again. And even though I’ve spent most of my time here now talking about the negative sides of social media, I think that responsible figures posting news content on social media is the right decision to make when trying to reach the younger audience. TikTok is an open platform in Norway, used by a large number of young adults. Out of the different social media platforms, TikTok is the most important source of news for many young Norwegians. As long as they are on TikTok, we need to inform them, give them content they can trust, and we need to show them that we, an editor-led broadcaster, exists. We need to be aware and skeptical of how the social media algorithms work. But that does not mean that we must leave these platforms and leave the youth there on their own. We must offer trust, clarity, and context in a chaotic media landscape.

Ada Bjoranger: Hi, my name is Ada. I’m a journalist in Fæven Ung, which directly translates to Fæven Young. Fæven is a regional newspaper in the south of Norway, and in the fall 2023, they started the Young Project. Through this project, all high school students in our area gets access to our newspaper. They get their own digital subscription. We’re three journalists who work in the project full-time, and our job mainly consists of two things. One, we make targeted news, or news targeted towards young people. And two, we visit the youth in their classrooms and tell them about journalism and what a journalist actually does. This project is a non-profit, and it’s funded by local businesses and foundations who also believe that the students should have access to their local news. So why do we do it? I’m going to talk about how we do it, but first I just want to tell you a little bit about the background. As Catharina and Sølve has already said, young people don’t relate to news in the same way as before. They navigate the landscape containing an overwhelming amount of information. And even though we’re a local or regional newspaper, most young people didn’t have a connection to us. They didn’t know who we were or what we did. One thing, and they didn’t engage in our debate columns, one thing is that they didn’t write their own opinion pieces. But a lot of young people also didn’t want to be interviewed, even in stories that were about things that were important to them. A lot of them said that they didn’t want to be interviewed because they didn’t know enough. And therefore, FN figured that they should have access to their local news. So that resulted in them gaining access. We’re at eight schools now, and all students in those schools have access to their own subscription. Do we do it? We do this because we believe that the day they wake up and they’re finished with high school, they’ll pay for their own subscription. No, but we want them to know that we exist and why we exist. And we want them to understand what journalism is. And then we hope that one day when they’re 30, maybe they will be willing to pay for news. We don’t believe that it’s enough to just give them a subscription. Therefore, an important part of this project is that we, the journalists, we travel around to schools and talk to the students. We spend about half our time doing that. And then the other half we spent on making targeted journalism. On our news site, or on FEVN’s site, we have a dedicated section labeled Young, where we feature stories on topics that are important to them. This is a small section of both articles and opinion pieces. And as you can see, it’s entirely young people who are front and center. Too often we think adults speak on issues that directly affect young people. And that’s something we’re trying to change. We want young people to carry the stories and be the main sources in matters that concern them. And if they don’t speak up about the things that are closely tied to their own lives, we lose valuable perspectives. And it’s also about taking them and their experiences and their everyday life seriously. This screenshot is taken in May, which is when the graduation celebration period in Norway is also known as Ryssetid. And a lot of the stories that you see here are about that. It’s a major celebration that lasts for several weeks. And if you include all the planning and fundraising, it lasts for years for a lot of them. So in May, this is one of the topics that we write the most about. For instance, we travel to the biggest celebration festival associated with this celebration and report it from there. And for us, it’s important to cover both the fun and joyful sides of the celebration. Down to the right there, you see one article that’s about a group that won a prize at this festival. It’s a feel-good piece and one that might not have been written if we hadn’t actively chosen to prioritize this kind of youth-focused content. There’s another story there with two boys in the picture. The headline translates to, it clashes with exam prep, so many in the class sold their tickets. And this is also a story from that festival, which captures the atmosphere there. But it also brings attention to an ongoing political issue in Norway, the timing of final exams during this celebration period. Creating articles is not enough, we think, so we also spend a lot of time on social media and creating social media content. We aim to be a serious and credible source on the platforms that they spend the most time on. So almost all of the stories we make, we also make for TikTok. And the youth recognize us from there. That’s where they see us and they get to know that we exist through seeing us on social media. This is an example of one of the article series that we have made. It’s a project where we visited all the cafeterias in the different schools that our project is on. We tested the food and we spoke to the students. We made summaries of the prices and interviewed students and cafeteria staff. Each cafeteria visit got its own article as well as a social media post. And in the comments, the students really engaged. They asked, when are you coming to my school? And they discussed which school had the best cafeteria. And also when we’re out on schools, after the publishing of this, they ask us about it. They say, we saw you were there, why haven’t you been here? How was the food there? And they’re engaging. It’s not only about asking the youth to participate in the articles we normally write. An important part of this is to cover the topics that are important in their life. Every high school student in Kristiansand has some sort of relation to their cafeteria. And most of them are there every day. Then the other part of the project. One of the most valuable aspects of this project is the classroom visits. Teachers can book us to come and talk to the class about journalism. The introduction course mainly consists of two things. We talk about journalism, what a journalist actually does. And then we also talk about the importance of participating in the public debate. Many students don’t know what a journalist is or what we do. So we come in to explain and teach them about source criticism, fact checking, media ethics and what our work actually consists of. The second part focuses on debate and the importance of participating in public discourse. We run exercises that help the students practice expressing themselves. One example is that everyone gets a table tennis racket with a green side and a red side. We present them with different statements and they show whether they agree or don’t by showing the red side or the green side. The statements might be things like public transport is inadequate or all exams should be graded anonymously. In this way everyone gets to express their opinion and take part in the shared exchange of views in the classroom without actually having to say anything. Some classes are very, very quiet and then other classes can hardly stop discussing after we do this. But even in the most quiet groups we often find that doing this kind of exercise a few times helps them feel confident enough to finally or eventually speak up and the discussion starts after a little while. We also create custom programs when schools request them, for example theme days or when students are working on a specific topic. One of the photos here, the one on the right, the one on the left is from a theme day at a school this fall focusing on fake news on the US election. We brought several other people from the office with us including our political editor. This is something we do quite frequently, quite regularly. We bring other journalists in so the whole office is involved in this project. For instance we’ve taken crime reporters to classes studying law and sports journalists to sport classes to make the content more relevant for each group of students. And then the second photo there is from a visit to the newsroom. School classes can come by and see how we work and where we work and greet the journalists. So a little bit about the results. So far in the project we’ve met thousands of young people. A total of 3380 students have created a user on FNNO and the number of students that are on the schools that we are at is a little bit over 5000. So that’s quite a big part of them. We’ve had 170 of our introduction courses or class visits in addition to many other sessions including a debate training for more than 600 students. We’ve also published 150 opinion pieces from young writers. This is a photo of some of them. They cover a wide range of topics but these are voices that we want to hear. Voices we might have never heard otherwise. Voices that offer different perspectives and raise issues that are often absent from traditional opinion sections. A lot of these posts is about, in one way or another, what it’s like growing up today. Some of the headlines include, you were cool if you beat someone up, kids today aren’t really kids. And remember that mom and dad aren’t always right. So what’s next? We don’t have a stop date for this project. We continue for the next school year and we plan to expand on more schools. We get very good feedback from both students and schools, teachers and others. And we share our experiences with people who want to do the same. So now the project is spreading. Multiple other newspapers in Norway are starting up their own young project.

Solve Kuraas Karlsen: Then we have some time for questions if there is anyone who wants to take questions. The mic over there.

Audience: Hi. Okay. I read my question but my English now is good. My question is from Katarina. My name is Fiorella Ferrari. I am from Peru. We work to ensure that people can access information safely and friendly. They use technology including digital media. TikTok is the platform with the great reach and go Peruvian zone. In April next year in Peru, we hold presidential and congressional election. Yes? In this context, but the platform, the TikTok, in this context, influencer, yes? We play a significant role in the public debate. Yes? But the Peruvian zone, really, it’s a huge difference from Norway. Yes? But that’s why I want the question specific. Do you have a specific strategy in place to prevent online violence? Why? Because you have your public face. Yes? You’re a woman. Yes, it’s positive in the platform. You have a strategy, but for the prevention violence in TikTok, this is the question.

Katarina Juni Moneta: Sorry, my nose. If I understand you correctly, you’re asking in a way how I protect myself. Yes. Yes. Yes. Well, it’s very different in Norway than it sounds like it is in where you’re from. But I do get, when I was on TikTok, I did get death threats and hate comments and things like that. But for example, where I work now, I have people taking care of it if that happens. But the threat really isn’t, it doesn’t really exist in Norway. So I’m sorry, I don’t have any good advice there. Yeah. But we can add

Solve Kuraas Karlsen: that sometimes it’s really good to be a part of a team. Yeah. So for example, you always get those comments in the TikTok feed and have someone else check it out, for example, so you don’t feel the threat that close. Yeah. And for me, I’ve contacted the police a couple

Katarina Juni Moneta: of times if I’ve been worried about what sort of threat it is and if it’s a real threat. And luckily it hasn’t been anything that’s been dangerous for me. But we have systems that work very well to protect us. Yeah. Any other questions? Yeah.

Audience: Thank you. And I apologize. I was late, so I missed the beginning. But I have three questions and you don’t have to get at all of them. I don’t expect that. But I’m happy to learn about your work. I do kind of in the same line, sensibilization work in my context in Geneva. And I was wondering first, if you encountered any differences that you go to different schools, different socioeconomic backgrounds, to the effectiveness of your work, depending on those backgrounds. Something I find is usually the more richer schools, I have a much easier time doing this work and the places where it’s most needed, usually less effective. Any advice on that? Second, I was wondering, since we’re here at the IGF, what do you tell to students who have no idea what it is and do not even treat the internet as an object of political discussion and mostly treated as entertainment? What do you tell these students? And I forgot my third question, but I’ll stop there. Thank you very much for your work.

Solve Kuraas Karlsen: Ada, maybe you can say something about different schools?

Ada Bjoranger: Yeah. I’m guessing it’s not that big of a difference here as maybe other places when it comes to economics and those things, at least not in Kjusandsholm, in the south of Norway. But what we find is a good thing about being in the schools is that we also reach different kinds of youth. We reach the whole class, which is students from all different backgrounds. So by being in the schools, we reach those that we probably wouldn’t have reached with just giving them the subscription, for example.

Katarina Juni Moneta: We also find that something that’s very important is to make content with people and not about people, especially when trying to reach different minorities.

Solve Kuraas Karlsen: Yes. And our project, which is seated in Oslo, we have to say that this difference between those who have much money and less money. But as I said already, you need to go to those different groups and talk with their language at eye height. Is there another question over here? Or no? You have a question? Yeah.

Audience: Hi. Hi. Hi. My name is Johnny Erlings. I’m from the Dutch Ministry of Justice. First of all, thank you for having one of the few panels with clear, concise solutions to information integrity problems. So thank you for that. My question is, I’m really happy to hear that youth is still interested in hearing news, but they have to navigate through so much content. How do you prioritize with your fact-checking work, with your targeting young people to have them participate? How do you decide what kind of content to interact with, what kind of news to

Solve Kuraas Karlsen: share with them? Well, you will not reach everything. I see my time limit is coming close, but you have to see what’s viral. That’s often important. And you need to have contact with the young people. So that’s maybe the baseline here. You need to talk with the young people, meet them and hear what’s important for them, because it’s really easy for adults to tell what is important. We

Katarina Juni Moneta: need to see what is important for them. Yeah, yeah, I agree. And we also need to think that there’s so much information out there and meeting that information with more information isn’t necessarily what we should be doing. We should try to filter out what is actually important for them. But that’s a challenge, trying to figure out what is important. But that’s what we try to do, rather than just giving them more and more and more and more information all the time.

Solve Kuraas Karlsen: And that’s the good part. Internet never forgets. So if you post something, it will still come back to you. But then we are out of time. Thank you. And please keep on the conversation. Thank you. Thank you.

Agreement points

Young people primarily consume news through social media platforms, requiring media organizations to meet them where they are

Speakers

– Solve Kuraas Karlsen
– Katarina Juni Moneta
– Ada Bjoranger

Arguments

Young people get information from social media platforms like TikTok and Snapchat, making it difficult to identify reliable sources and understand the narrative behind visual content

Responsible media organizations must maintain presence on social platforms to provide trustworthy content and show young people that credible alternatives exist

The Fæven Young project provides free digital subscriptions to high school students and creates targeted content featuring young people as main sources in stories that affect them

Summary

All speakers agree that young people’s media consumption has shifted to social platforms, and rather than avoiding these platforms, media organizations and educators must engage on them to provide reliable information and education

Topics

Online education | Content policy | Freedom of the press

Direct engagement and education are essential for media literacy, requiring face-to-face interaction with young people

Speakers

– Solve Kuraas Karlsen
– Ada Bjoranger

Arguments

Building alliances with librarians, teachers, and social workers is essential, as no single organization can address media literacy challenges alone

Classroom visits by journalists are essential to explain journalism and encourage participation in public debate through interactive exercises and discussions

Summary

Both speakers emphasize that media literacy cannot be achieved through digital means alone but requires direct, personal engagement through classroom visits, workshops, and collaborative efforts with educational institutions

Topics

Online education | Capacity development | Freedom of the press

Understanding what matters to young people requires listening to them directly rather than making adult assumptions

Speakers

– Solve Kuraas Karlsen
– Ada Bjoranger
– Audience

Arguments

TENK creates lesson plans connected to current news events and social trends, teaching tools like reverse image search to help students verify information and navigate the digital landscape

Covering topics relevant to youth daily life, like school cafeterias and graduation celebrations, helps engage students and makes them recognize the value of local journalism

Prioritizing content requires understanding what’s viral and maintaining direct contact with young people to understand their concerns rather than assuming what adults think is important

Summary

All agree that effective youth engagement requires understanding young people’s actual interests and concerns, including seemingly trivial topics like cafeteria food or social trends, rather than imposing adult priorities

Topics

Online education | Content policy | Youth engagement

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers recognize the vulnerability of young people to misleading content, whether AI-generated or from unverified influencers, and the need for education to help them distinguish reliable from unreliable sources

Speakers

– Solve Kuraas Karlsen
– Katarina Juni Moneta

Arguments

AI-generated content, including fake images of celebrities and manipulated political videos, is increasingly difficult for young people to identify without proper tools and education

Young people easily trust influencers without fact-checking, giving individual content creators enormous responsibility over public opinion and democratic participation

Topics

Content policy | Digital identities | Consumer protection

Both speakers emphasize the importance of distinguishing professional journalism from other forms of content creation and the need to educate young people about the value and methods of traditional journalism

Speakers

– Katarina Juni Moneta
– Ada Bjoranger

Arguments

There are concerns about declining trust in editor-led media while private tech companies control information flow through opaque algorithms

Students need to understand what journalism is and what journalists actually do, as many don’t know the difference between influencers and editor-led media

Topics

Freedom of the press | Online education | Content policy

Unexpected consensus

Embracing rather than rejecting social media platforms for educational and journalistic purposes

Speakers

– Solve Kuraas Karlsen
– Katarina Juni Moneta
– Ada Bjoranger

Arguments

Young people get information from social media platforms like TikTok and Snapchat, making it difficult to identify reliable sources and understand the narrative behind visual content

Responsible media organizations must maintain presence on social platforms to provide trustworthy content and show young people that credible alternatives exist

The Fæven Young project provides free digital subscriptions to high school students and creates targeted content featuring young people as main sources in stories that affect them

Explanation

Despite acknowledging significant problems with social media algorithms, misinformation, and platform control by private companies, all speakers advocate for engaging with these platforms rather than avoiding them. This represents an unexpected pragmatic consensus that working within problematic systems is better than abandoning young audiences to navigate them alone

Topics

Content policy | Online education | Freedom of the press

The importance of covering seemingly trivial youth topics as legitimate journalism

Speakers

– Solve Kuraas Karlsen
– Ada Bjoranger

Arguments

TENK creates lesson plans connected to current news events and social trends, teaching tools like reverse image search to help students verify information and navigate the digital landscape

Covering topics relevant to youth daily life, like school cafeterias and graduation celebrations, helps engage students and makes them recognize the value of local journalism

Explanation

Both speakers demonstrate unexpected consensus that topics traditionally dismissed as trivial (social media trends, cafeteria food, graduation parties) are legitimate subjects for serious journalistic and educational attention. This represents a significant shift from traditional news values toward youth-centered content priorities

Topics

Content policy | Online education | Cultural diversity

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers demonstrate strong consensus on the need for proactive engagement with young people through their preferred platforms and formats, the importance of direct educational intervention, and the value of listening to youth perspectives rather than imposing adult priorities

Consensus level

High level of consensus with significant implications for media literacy education and youth journalism. The agreement suggests a mature, pragmatic approach that acknowledges platform problems while prioritizing youth engagement over ideological purity. This consensus could inform policy approaches that emphasize education and engagement over restriction and regulation

Different viewpoints

Unexpected differences

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers showed remarkable consensus on the challenges facing youth media literacy and the need for multi-faceted approaches to address them. There were no direct disagreements identified in the transcript.

Disagreement level

Very low disagreement level. The speakers presented complementary rather than conflicting approaches to youth media literacy. Their different perspectives (fact-checking education, influencer-to-journalist transition, and local journalism engagement) reinforced rather than contradicted each other. This high level of agreement suggests a mature understanding of the complexity of media literacy challenges and the need for diverse, coordinated responses rather than single solutions.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

Both speakers recognize the vulnerability of young people to misleading content, whether AI-generated or from unverified influencers, and the need for education to help them distinguish reliable from unreliable sources

Speakers

– Solve Kuraas Karlsen
– Katarina Juni Moneta

Arguments

AI-generated content, including fake images of celebrities and manipulated political videos, is increasingly difficult for young people to identify without proper tools and education

Young people easily trust influencers without fact-checking, giving individual content creators enormous responsibility over public opinion and democratic participation

Topics

Content policy | Digital identities | Consumer protection

Both speakers emphasize the importance of distinguishing professional journalism from other forms of content creation and the need to educate young people about the value and methods of traditional journalism

Speakers

– Katarina Juni Moneta
– Ada Bjoranger

Arguments

There are concerns about declining trust in editor-led media while private tech companies control information flow through opaque algorithms

Students need to understand what journalism is and what journalists actually do, as many don’t know the difference between influencers and editor-led media

Topics

Freedom of the press | Online education | Content policy

Key takeaways

Young people primarily consume news through social media platforms like TikTok and Snapchat, making traditional media literacy approaches insufficient – educators must meet youth where they are rather than trying to pull them away from these platforms

Social media algorithms create a dangerous cycle where content creators are incentivized to become more extreme and sensational to gain engagement, leading to polarized public discourse and echo chambers that limit exposure to diverse viewpoints

There is a critical trust gap where young people often trust individual influencers more than established media outlets, giving unqualified content creators enormous influence over public opinion and democratic participation

Effective media literacy requires collaborative approaches involving multiple stakeholders – teachers, librarians, social workers, and journalists must work together as no single organization can address these challenges alone

Practical tools and real-time education are essential – teaching techniques like reverse image search and AI detection must be connected to current events and trending topics to remain relevant and engaging

Local journalism can successfully engage youth through targeted content creation, classroom visits, and covering topics relevant to their daily lives, but requires sustained investment and innovative approaches like free subscriptions

The balance between embracing social media’s democratic potential while addressing its risks requires responsible media organizations to maintain presence on these platforms to provide credible alternatives

Resolutions and action items

Continue expanding the Fæven Young project to more schools based on positive feedback and results

Share experiences and methodologies with other newspapers interested in starting similar youth engagement projects

Maintain regular classroom visits and continue developing interactive exercises to encourage youth participation in public discourse

Keep updating educational content and tools in real-time to address current trends and emerging technologies like AI

Sustain presence on social media platforms like TikTok to provide credible news content where young people are already consuming information

Unresolved issues

How to effectively prevent online violence and harassment, particularly for women content creators in different cultural contexts – the Norwegian experience may not translate to other regions with higher threat levels

How to address socioeconomic disparities in media literacy effectiveness – the challenge that interventions work better in affluent schools while being most needed in disadvantaged communities

How to help students who view the internet purely as entertainment understand it as a space for political discussion and civic engagement

How to prioritize which content and disinformation to address given the overwhelming volume of information and limited resources

Long-term sustainability and funding models for media literacy initiatives and youth journalism projects

How to measure the actual impact of these interventions on democratic participation and information literacy over time

Suggested compromises

Accept that the media landscape has fundamentally changed and work within social media platforms rather than trying to eliminate their influence

Focus on filtering and contextualizing important information rather than trying to counter all misinformation with more information

Balance the need to address social media’s negative aspects while acknowledging and preserving its positive democratic potential for youth expression and community building

Combine giving youth access to quality journalism (like free subscriptions) with active education and engagement rather than relying on either approach alone

So my online persona became a sort of character in the TikTok matrix. It was still me, but it was an amplified version of me. And why did that happen? Well, because it worked. It got me likes, it got me engagement, and it got me followers… And in that way, the algorithm shaped me.

Speaker

Katarina Juni Moneta

Reason

This comment provides a deeply personal and honest reflection on how social media algorithms don’t just distribute content but actively shape the creators themselves. It reveals the psychological mechanism behind content creation and challenges the assumption that creators maintain full agency over their content. The metaphor of becoming a ‘character in the TikTok matrix’ powerfully illustrates how platform dynamics can alter one’s authentic self-expression.

Impact

This comment shifted the discussion from external media literacy challenges to the internal psychological effects on content creators. It introduced the concept of algorithmic influence as a bidirectional relationship, setting up the framework for discussing how this affects public discourse and democracy. It also provided credibility to the panel’s arguments through lived experience rather than just theoretical knowledge.

What happens to democracy when young people spend more time listening to influencers than to journalists and politicians? Who do we trust, and how does this shape our elections or our ability to collectively act during crisis?

Speaker

Katarina Juni Moneta

Reason

This comment elevates the discussion from individual media literacy concerns to fundamental questions about democratic governance and social cohesion. It connects the micro-level behaviors of social media consumption to macro-level democratic processes, highlighting the stakes involved in media literacy education.

Impact

This comment served as a pivotal moment that reframed the entire discussion around democratic implications rather than just educational challenges. It provided the philosophical foundation for why their work matters beyond just helping students avoid misinformation, connecting their practical efforts to broader societal concerns.

We must not underestimate how important that is. TikTok is an important news source for young people… We must offer trust, clarity, and context in a chaotic media landscape.

Speaker

Katarina Juni Moneta

Reason

This comment presents a nuanced, balanced perspective that acknowledges both the risks and democratic value of social media platforms. Rather than taking a purely critical stance, it recognizes social media as a legitimate space for democratic participation, which challenges common adult dismissiveness of youth digital engagement.

Impact

This comment provided a crucial counterbalance to the earlier criticisms of social media, preventing the discussion from becoming one-sided. It justified the panelists’ strategy of meeting young people where they are rather than trying to pull them away from these platforms, and it validated young people’s use of social media for civic engagement.

It’s not only about asking the youth to participate in the articles we normally write. An important part of this is to cover the topics that are important in their life. Every high school student in Kristiansand has some sort of relation to their cafeteria.

Speaker

Ada Bjoranger

Reason

This seemingly simple comment reveals a profound insight about youth engagement: that relevance precedes participation. By using the cafeteria example, it demonstrates how taking young people’s daily experiences seriously can be a gateway to broader civic engagement. It challenges the traditional hierarchy of what constitutes ‘important’ news.

Impact

This comment illustrated the practical application of youth-centered journalism and provided a concrete example of how to bridge the gap between young people’s lived experiences and broader civic participation. It showed how seemingly mundane topics can serve as entry points for democratic engagement.

You need to go to those different groups and talk with their language at eye height… You need to talk with the young people, meet them and hear what’s important for them, because it’s really easy for adults to tell what is important.

Speaker

Solve Kuraas Karlsen

Reason

This comment encapsulates a fundamental principle of effective youth engagement that challenges adult-centric approaches to media literacy. The phrase ‘at eye height’ suggests equality and respect rather than condescension, while acknowledging that adults often impose their priorities rather than listening to young people’s actual concerns.

Impact

This comment provided a methodological framework that unified all three presenters’ approaches, emphasizing the importance of genuine dialogue rather than top-down education. It reinforced the collaborative rather than instructional nature of their work and validated youth perspectives as legitimate and valuable.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally shaped the discussion by elevating it from a technical presentation about media literacy tools to a nuanced exploration of democracy, authenticity, and intergenerational dialogue in the digital age. Katarina’s personal revelations about algorithmic influence provided emotional depth and credibility, while her democratic framing gave the work broader significance. Ada’s practical examples grounded the theoretical discussions in concrete action, and Solve’s emphasis on respectful dialogue provided the philosophical foundation for their approach. Together, these comments created a multi-layered conversation that acknowledged both the challenges and opportunities of social media while positioning young people as partners rather than passive recipients of adult wisdom. The discussion successfully avoided both technophobic dismissal of social media and naive acceptance of its risks, instead presenting a mature, balanced approach to navigating digital democracy.

How do we prioritize with fact-checking work and targeting young people to have them participate? How do you decide what kind of content to interact with, what kind of news to share with them?

Speaker

Johnny Erlings (Dutch Ministry of Justice)

Explanation

This addresses the challenge of filtering through overwhelming amounts of information to determine what is most relevant and important for young audiences in media literacy education

Do you have a specific strategy in place to prevent online violence, particularly for women with public faces on platforms like TikTok?

Speaker

Fiorella Ferrari (Peru)

Explanation

This highlights the need for safety strategies for content creators, especially women, who face threats and harassment online, particularly in different cultural contexts

Are there differences in effectiveness when working with schools from different socioeconomic backgrounds?

Speaker

Audience member from Geneva

Explanation

This explores whether media literacy interventions are equally effective across different socioeconomic groups and how to adapt approaches for maximum impact

What do you tell students who have no idea what the internet governance is and do not treat the internet as an object of political discussion, mostly treating it as entertainment?

Speaker

Audience member from Geneva

Explanation

This addresses the challenge of helping young people understand the political and governance aspects of digital platforms they use primarily for entertainment

How will we notice gradual changes in social media algorithms and their impact on content consumption?

Speaker

Katarina Juni Moneta

Explanation

This raises concerns about the lack of transparency in algorithm changes and the need for better monitoring of how these changes shape public discourse and information consumption

What happens to democracy when young people spend more time listening to influencers than to journalists and politicians?

Speaker

Katarina Juni Moneta

Explanation

This explores the long-term implications for democratic participation and informed citizenship when traditional gatekeepers of information are replaced by influencers

How does the reward system of social media algorithms affect public discourse and democratic participation?

Speaker

Katarina Juni Moneta

Explanation

This examines the broader societal implications of attention-driven content creation and its impact on political discourse and democratic processes