For the final draft of our game, Newsroom Sensation, we made a few changes. First, since we had more time, we made it a bit nicer to look at - we added a background image (credit below), as well as changed some of the colors to better contrast with the theme color.
More substantial changes we made had to do with content. We edited the Mr. S scenarios to include headlines that players can choose whether or not to publish. We also modified the beginning instructions by splitting them into two slides to make them a bit clearer. The point system remained the same, but we played around with the gains and losses throughout the scenarios to make them more consistent (for the most part, a point change will only occur once an article is published).

If we had more time, we probably could have made this game a bit more visually pleasing or paid more attention to graphics. It's definitely not ugly as it stands right now, but with more time we may have been able to reorganize things in such away that would allow us to include more images.
We also would have used a different program to allow us to make the point system automatic. But as it stands, doing so would take a truly disgusting amount of time-consuming work, as well as a huge transfer of data from slides to a new tool, so we decided to forego it.

We learned a lot while making this game. Individually, we had an idea of what sensationalism is, but the research we put into creating this game gave that understanding more depth. We learned strategies for better identifying it in headlines, as well as the different kinds of sensationalism and the methods of using it. We also learned about the motivations behind it, which were surprisingly not all monetary - as you can tell from a scenario in the game, sometimes there are nobler or at least slightly less deceptive motivations behind it. Finally, we looked a lot into how opting for or against sensationalism can impact an organization, and we learned of all the ways such things could be tackled.

A lot of work went into this game in terms of research and execution, so we hope you'll have fun playing it! Click here to try it out!

Background image for the game:
"Newspapers B&W (5)" by NS Newsflash is licensed under CC BY 2.0, https://search.creativecommons.org/photos/22824b31-dcb2-42e7-9301-0b15ec9e8039

​Links to articles:
https://theconversation.com/aiming-for-novelty-in-coronavirus-coverage-journalists-end-up-sensationalizing-the-trivial-and-untrue-138506 
https://examples.yourdictionary.com/brilliant-clickbait-examples-and-why-they-work.html 
https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1178220.shtml
https://hbr.org/2017/01/the-u-s-medias-problems-are-much-bigger-than-fake-news-and-filter-bubbles 
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/porn-model-murder-the-secret-life-of-zoey-zane/ 

Scholarly Sources:
Garrett, L. (2020). COVID-19: the medium is the message. The lancet, 395(10228), 942-943.
Lowe, L. (2016). Crying wolf: An analysis of the use of sensational content within the media and the desensitizing effects it has on audiences.
Scacco, Joshua and Muddiman, Ashley. (2015, December). The Current State of News Headlines. Center for Media Engagement. https://mediaengagement.org/research/the-current-state-of-news-headlines/ 

.For the assignment, I watched Joy Buolamwini's TEDTalk and read this article on Silicon Valley.
Some quotes that stood out for me included these:

1. “Algorithms, like viruses, can spread bias on a massive scale at a rapid pace” (Joy Buolamwini)

Right from the beginning of her TEDTalk, this quote caught my eye. I know a lot of people have well-founded issues with algorithms but it’s the first time I’ve seen them referred to as a virus, and I found it disturbingly appropriate.

2. "You can hire employees all day, and if you don’t have accountability in your workplace they’re all gonna leave.” (Y-Vonne Hutchinson via Will Oremus)

I liked this quote from the article a lot because it calls out big companies on their ineffective, short-sighted and short-term solutions. Their current approaches are shoddy. It’s like putting your food in a broken refrigerator, only for it to spoil, but for some reason you decide the best solution is to get new food instead of fixing the fridge? This solves nothing and you’re priming the next batch of people to be abused in the same way those before were.

3. ""[Proctorio has] claimed to have heard of ‘fewer than five’ instances where there were issues with face recognition due to race”” (Akash Satheesan via Todd Feathers)

Frankly, I found this quote hilarious in its audacity. If you wish to fake a statistic on a well-known issue, at least do so believably because this is almost insulting. The fact that some companies can be so willfully ignorant or flat out dishonest when it comes to legitimate issues is both concerning and anger-inducing.

Newsroom Sensation! is the tentative title for our digital narrative game about sensationalism. In it, you play as a manager in a newsroom, working with journalists and editors to approve articles and headlines.

You play with a point system that you keep a tally of for Integrity and Popularity respectively. Different tasks and events in the game affect your score - and depending on how you're doing by the end, you'll reach a different ending! There are five endings total besides the automatic loss for letting either your Integrity or Popularity drop to zero.

By the end of it, you should be able to identify sensationalism and the ways news media goes about using it. You should also have a better idea of examples of sensationalism, and why people might choose to use it despite it potentially being deceptive or misleading.

You can play the game by clicking here. Keep in mind that we haven't added any visuals as of yet, but we definitely intend to. Otherwise, we'd love to hear what you think of the game! Feel free to leave feedback to let us know what we can work on.

Last Thursday, we attended a session by Mays Imad on Trauma-Informed Pedagogy and Hope. In it, she talked a lot about students and how this unique environment of online learning during the pandemic can be so much a cause of stress that it can create trauma. She went over both scientific and more general aspects of it, citing studies, consulting diagrams of brain activity, and even sharing personal stories about her experiences on the topic. The aim of the session was to examine mental and emotional stress over prolonged periods of time.

I found the whole session rather surprising; I didn't realize that so much study and consideration went into the effects of online stress, specifically, on students. I was surprised to hear about experiences that were similar to those I've lived or seen over the past year. It helped me better appreciate the professors I have who go out of their way to ensure that we don't have such a hard time. What I especially found interesting was how many small things can be done to lessen the impact of constant stress on everyone as a whole.

That said, the thing that stuck with me most from the session was the discussion of one's "What" versus their "Why." Even besides the context of the presentation, I found that the concept really resonated with me - because once you think about it, it's true that people often worry about what is being done rather than why. It's a matter of the motivation, the intention, behind an action, that has the ability to redefine the thing being done entirely. It's something I think everyone vaguely recognizes when they go about making decisions, but not something they acknowledge consciously. At least, not unless explicitly asked.

In the context of the discussion, I found it a very meaningful way to consider how to run a class. For example, I think if we were to consult the "Why vs What" debate, we would effectively eliminate busywork. I think it would also be beneficial to students because it would allow us to direct our focus on assignments that have more value to them - if there is a distinct meaning behind every piece of work given to us beyond the need to have a handful of grades to reach an average, then I feel like the benefit would be universal.

This concept extends beyond even the context of school, and I feel is something interesting to consider as a person deciding what to do with their life. In my case, my goal is to graduate and go into some kind of teaching profession. This would constitute my "What," and it could very well be shared by many a person around me. My "Why," however, is more personal to me: I want to teach because I enjoy being able to help people succeed in doing what they want to do. It displays my intentions in a way that differs from if my "Why" was to have a job with a stable income or to have one with certain benefits.

My point is that I really like that concept that we talked about, specifically, because of how it can be applied in the context of school and in life beyond. All in all, I found the whole session pretty interesting. It's encouraging to see how much work and study goes into this issue of trauma and stress.

Over the past several weeks, I've been keeping a gratitude journal as part of a self-development project. The way I go about it is this: I have a super old notebook that I pulled out of the depths of my closet, and I repurposed it to be my journal, which I take the time to write in almost every day.

I'm not the best when it comes to consistency, but surprisingly, I managed to write something down nearly every night! I found it a fun experience, and looking back at what I have so far is pretty interesting. You really don't realize all the things you can appreciate on a daily basis, and I think keeping a journal like this has not only shown me a MULTITUDE of things to be grateful for - it has also shown me my values. Or at least, the things that come time and again to make my life pleasant.

So, so many days, the things I was grateful for were my friends and family. Yeah, yeah, it seems basic, but I liked to write down the things that really made my day, and more often than not it was those I was close to. It worries me, in hindsight, how much I take the people around me for granted sometimes. Writing in the journal got me thinking, how many other people can say they're blessed enough to have as caring and fun siblings as mine? A younger sister who is always ready to drop everything to spend time with me or an older brother who loves me as much as he loves to mess with me? In this day and age I'm simply thankful to have both my parents around! And the fact that they're so supportive and hardworking and admirable and a million other things that would take too long to type? I really have a lot to be grateful for; and the journal showed me the extent of that.

And this is to say nothing of friends who, despite time differences and wildly different locations, are always able to text me and help me out when I need it. To share enthusiasm about hobbies, to proofread work or an application, to chat and be silly - there's nothing I ask of them that is ever met with immediate refusal. Truly! I'm a very lucky human being, and I'm glad that I could write it down to appreciate it.

Of course, not all the entries in my journal were so meaningful. But see, that's the nice thing about it! It's my journal, so I'm free to write about what I'm thankful for, no matter how insignificant. As the weeks went on, I noticed more and more things that made me happy (and I'm always grateful for whatever puts a smile on my face). Did I come upon a really good book to read? Thankful! Was the weather nice enough to take a walk outside and not freeze to death? Thankful! Did my cat finally sit still long enough for me to take a photo of him for my photography assignment? INCREDIBLY THANKFUL! Gratitude is all a matter of perspective, so it can easily be turned upon the little things.

That said, another thing keeping this journal made me realize is how much I enjoy complaining. I'm not exactly sure why, but so many times, I sat down to write and the first thing that came to mind was to jot down why something in my day managed to tick me off. This is the exact opposite of gratitude, but seeing as when I journal for myself it's usually a way to cool off bouts of unrelenting fury, I see why I maybe have the urge. However, I did manage to turn this around; like I said, gratitude is a matter of perspective. So, I turned complaints about a butt-whoopingly busy day into thankfulness for the fact that I am done with it, and frustration with a particular class into gratitude that I only have to take it for a few more weeks before I never have to give it another moment's peace of mind again.

I think, all in all, what I'm trying to say is that keeping this journal left me with a bunch of valuable takeaways. It's helped me realize how precious my friends and family are because of how much and how often they're just there when I need them, and that I should appreciate them more. Actively! It's also shown me how I can appreciate even the smallest and most insignificant details of my day, and how recognizing them is both pleasant and a great deal of fun. And finally, it's shown me how to take my woes and turn them into something positive (and if I said I didn't do this at least partially out of spite because I don't like to give things the power to upset me, then I'd be lying).

In the event of low integrity and good popularity...
​The paper has finally started to get back on its feet after a slow few weeks. You’ve had to publish some articles that are a bit less objective than you were initially comfortable with, but your readership is on the rise. The paper is stable.
You come to work to find the newsroom in a frenzy - they’ve got a scoop for a globally-followed running story, and the information is yet to become public knowledge. An article is written up and the editors are tasked with giving it a headline. Time is of the essence! But you have a problem. Will you…

1. Assign it a sensational headline? After all, chances like this don’t come by often. Do it, and you can forget just being “stable” - you could really catch some attention with this story! 
2. Give the article a more appropriate headline? It may be big news, but that isn’t a reason to blow it up. And we don’t need to beg for readers anymore. Won’t the story garner enough attention on its own?

​
Choosing 1 really will boost your popularity, but your integrity will take a hit. Your choice to sensationalize, while profitable, has lessened your credibility - especially because you sensationalized such a serious topic.
Choosing 2 will still boost your popularity while also increasing your integrity. The addition to the running story really was substantial enough to let the article stand on its own without any bells or whistles.

The Takeaway: As was previously stated, the business model for the media truly does reward sensationalism with its exciting and dramatic titles. So, it follows that even stable news agencies would seek to increase their ratings by taking up the practice whenever they’re able. The topic of sensationalism is especially relevant to running stories (like COVID-19 right now) because it is even more prone to misleading audiences than in regular coverage. Taking the example of COVID again, we’re always getting the most up-to-date information regarding safety measures, so it’s important that when such news does come out, it comes out clearly. Speed also factors into this, because oftentimes news agencies will publish first and make corrections later in order to catch the first readers. This, too, is rewarded by the system, even if it causes more chaos in the relay of information - doubly so when sensationalism is involved.

We decided to do our digital narrative game on sensationalism in the news, specifically in headlines. The general idea is to create a game to bring attention to exaggerated headlines, especially those related to COVID-19 and similarly popular news topics, and to show the negative effects that they can have on greater audiences.​

According to the Oxford Languages Dictionary, sensationalism is "the presentation of stories in a way that is intended to provoke public interest or excitement, at the expense of accuracy."

As such, it makes sense why companies or networks would opt for it; most of the time (unfortunately) news is not so much about information as it is about getting users to click on the article so they may be taken to their website. It's very profit-driven, and when the general motto is "publish first, verify later," you can bet a lot of exaggeration falls through the cracks.

​One might think that hyperbole is not nearly so detrimental as I might make it out to be, but I assure you this is wrong. Consider this: some media professional wants to publish some news about the pandemic. But the density of COVID news right now (and for the past year for that matter) makes such an article negligible, just another title in the crowd. So, how to make it stand out? Well, with an attention grabbing headline, of course!

And herein lies the problem: depending on what the professional decides to emphasize in their headline, potential audiences can be terribly misled. Take what Scacco and Muddiman (2015) have to say about this in the context of trials: "Headlines can, for instance, influence how news readers think about a whether a suspect is guilty of a crime. An early study of news headlines conducted by Percy H. Tannenbaum found that headlines suggesting that a person on trial was guilty led people who read a news story to think that person was guilty. A headline suggesting that a person was innocent led people who read the exact same news story to think that the person was innocent. In other words, changing only the headline led news readers to reach different conclusions about a person’s guilt or innocence."

As can be gathered from this passage, a headline can easily sway - and so easily mislead - an audience. And this is precisely what we wish to bring attention to with our game.

Another dangerous aspect of sensationalism lies on the other side of the spectrum of people's responses to news. While some might react strongly to every new COVID headline, for example, others may become desensitized by the sensationalism. If an alarm bell is constantly, constantly ringing to alert us to something, eventually it will fade into background noise. It may even become exhausting to follow especially because of the over-the-top sensationalism, thus resulting in pandemic fatigue, which could lead to general apathy towards the situation. 

This, in turn, is also bad because it means that when significant news does actually come in to play, people will not be able to pay attention to it as much as they should.

We found some relevant examples of exaggerated headlines, courtesy of YourDictionary.com

From Mother Jones, an article titled The Scary New Science That Shows Milk Is Bad For You, which ultimately "talks about how adults don't need as much calcium as previously suggested"

From CNN, the headline Ebola in the Air? A Nightmare That Could Happen, which leads to an article that explains how "the World Health Organization actually says that type of virus mutation is highly unlikely and is only speculation"

From Bloomberg, the alarming cover page Ebola is Coming, which resultingly "greatly exaggerated what was a very real threat without having to be sensationalized"

We were tasked with playing 6 total digital narrative games. The ones I ended up choosing besides Spent and BBC Syrian Refugees were Factitious, Responsible Partying, Domestic Violence in Egypt, and A Mother's Dilemma.
​

All these games had certain features in common and other features that made them unique, so I think it would be interesting to reflect on them by comparing them in terms of how educational they are vs how efficiently they mess with the player emotionally.

In my opinion, the games that were the most informative were probably Spent and Domestic Violence in Egypt. Each of them had an abundance of facts - after practically every choice made, information was offered to let you know if the action you just committed to was wise or unadvisable. Both games used the choices you made to inform you about the consequences and/or related facts, which really helps if you don't know the specifics of financial struggles or being with an abuser. A Mother's dilemma also did this quite well, and I personally really liked having more information about the possible steps you can take when a kid is getting bullied. Do you intervene at the risk of making it worse for the kid? If you intervene will it be with the school or the bully's parents? These questions are answered with reasons as to why each decision in the options given would be best. Next in terms of educational value would be the Syrian Refugee game and Responsible partying. While both did have facts and statistics in their narratives, I don't think they stood out as strongly as in the other games. And somehow Factitious turns up last. Not that it wasn't entertaining and objectively informative in the headlines it provides, it's just that the information provided regarding identifying fake news was relatively brief.
​
In terms of emotional impact, which I feel is also important to making sure a game "sticks" with you, I think I'll tie Syrian Refugees and A Mother's Dilemma. Like I said before playing the former game was just very upsetting. It makes me sad to think that people have to go through so much in order to live safely and that even those efforts are countered by media narratives against refugees. Truly, it's tragic. A Mother's Dilemma serves to make me similarly upset and angry because it reminds me of how easily harassment and bullying can be overlooked, excused, or dismissed at schools. Being put in the place of the mother was also a swift kick to the heart. Next up would be Spent and the Domestic Violence game. Again, it's the subject matter that gets me here - in both games the frustration with the situation is really played upon. While Spent tests your patience by throwing every conceivable unfavorable situation in your financially-strained face, the other game tries it by showing what people think they can get away with in a relationship. And it's even worse in this setting! Finally, the least emotionally impactful games were Responsible Partying and Factitious. I don't think either intended to have much of an emotional impact, but as a result they were each less memorable for me. The only non-information based criteria they offered was a story and the satisfaction of choosing correctly, but (likely due to the subject matter) they lacked an emotional hook.

John A. Powell and Stephen Menendian’s article “The Problem of Othering: Towards Inclusiveness and Belonging” raises many good points about the human tendency to categorize and how that impacts our experience in society. One of the points that stood out to me was that about demagoguery, which in itself makes me want to curse the existence of politicians in general. I suppose it was always something in my periphery, but that section in particular helped me put a word to the playing-on-fear techniques people in power like to use to cause frenzies. The examples of how Trump chose to “other” specific groups and so made such “othering” acceptable did nothing to improve my temper when reading.

Another point that stood out to me in this article is how the authors went about explaining the purpose for the term “Othering.” I never really gave much thought as to how other terms that serve the same purpose but on a far more specific scale can highlight the lines in the sand between groups of people. I remember in particular their note on how Barack Obama didn’t like to use the term “Islamophobia” in his addresses despite the criticism he faced for it, for similar reasons.

While I understand a lot of what the article is talking about, especially in terms of ingroups and outgroups and how we perceive ourselves and others because of them, I can fortunately say I have little experience feeling “othered” in group settings, at least in a truly harmful sense. I have, however, seen it happen to a lot of those around me. The first example to come to mind is how students were treated in school based on whether they were in the IB program vs American Diploma. You really wouldn’t think that the difference would create as big of a rift as it did, but it was quite obvious. Administrators’ favoritism of one group over another aside, the students in each of the groups themselves “othered” each other quite obviously.
​
For example, the later into high school you went, the less the two groups mixed. IB students had a tendency to favor their own, since they were made up of a smaller group and had forged bonds through stress and the shared pain of the grinder they were all being put through. Extra efforts in their program were made to strengthen bonds between them, and the unique schedule they endured through the end of the year brought them all together in their differences. This estranged them from AD students, who made up a much larger group. They were further divided by the sentiments they held towards each other (particularly that one group was composed of academic elitists and the other of lazy slackers), and matters were not improved by the general feeling that AD students were not attended to as closely.

​That said, come senior year, the lines between the groups had plenty of opportunity to be blurred and ignored. In events such as prom or during discussions as to the design of the senior jacket, the ingroups of “IB student” and “AD student” were forgotten in favor of the larger and more inclusive group of “high school senior.” From this, I think we can learn that one of the best ways to counter outgroup “othering” is to broaden our groups as much as possible and remind ourselves of our similarities more than our differences.