Time: 20 minutes

Objective:
To teach media literacy and help students obtain accurate information on which to base their beliefs and actions.

By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:

• Identify bias in a news source.
• Identify inaccurate information in a news source.

Standards Alignment:
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.9-10.2 / SL.11-12.2: Integrate multiple sources of information presented in diverse media or formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively, orally) evaluating the credibility and accuracy of each source.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.9-10.3 / SL.11-12.3: Evaluate a speaker's point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric, identifying any fallacious reasoning or exaggerated or distorted evidence.
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.9-10.1 / RI.11-12.1: Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text. (Including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain.)
CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.9-10.9 / W.11-12.9: Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis and reflection.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.1 / RH.11-12.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, connecting insights gained from specific details to an understanding of the text as a whole.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.2 / RH.11-12.2: Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary that makes clear the relationships among the key details and ideas.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.3 / RH.11-12.3: Evaluate various explanations for actions or events and determine which explanation best accords with textual evidence, acknowledging where the text leaves matters uncertain.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.4 / RH.11-12.4: Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including analyzing how an author uses and refines the meaning of a key term over the course of a text (e.g., how Madison defines faction in Federalist No. 10).
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.5 / RH.11-12.5: Analyze in detail how a complex primary source is structured, including how key sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text contribute to the whole.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.6 / RH.11-12.6: Evaluate authors' differing points of view on the same historical event or issue by assessing the authors' claims, reasoning, and evidence.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.8 / RH.11-12.8: Evaluate an author's premises, claims, and evidence by corroborating or challenging them with other information.
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.9-10.9 / RH.11-12.9: Integrate information from diverse sources, both primary and secondary, into a coherent understanding of an idea or event ,noting discrepancies among sources.

Short explanation (3–4 min)

Explain that United for Peace also stresses that people should not act or make a stand without making an effort to “fully review and understand the different sides” and use verifiable facts. Connect to students’ world: group chats, reposts, outrage online, “snap judgments” based on one clip or meme.

Two Headlines, One Story (10–12 min)

Distribute copies of the contrasting articles provided, and have students write answers to these questions:

• Which version made you feel angrier or more upset? Why?
• What important information did each version leave out?
• What questions would you want answered before deciding what you think?

Whole-class debrief (3–4 min)

• Ask: “If you saw only the emotional version on social media, how might you react?”
• Connect back: taking action based on partial or biased information can damage relationships and increase division.

Mini “Pause Before Posting” task (5 min)

Ask students to write 3 personal steps they could take before sharing or reacting online. For example:

1. Check who posted it and where it came from.
2. Look for at least one other source with a different perspective.
3. Wait 10 minutes and think if reacting publicly is helpful or just venting.

Invite a few volunteers to share their favorite step and create a quick class list.

Key Takeaway:
The prevalence of biased or inflammatory reporting and content. How to recognize poor information and avoid spreading it.