Campus Review Vol. 29 Issue 2 | February 2019 | Page 13

policy & reform campusreview.com.au So there’s no causality there. It’s a very complicated social, intellectual, personal and political environment that is being ‘unmanaged’ by ‘unleaders’. There’s a lack of leadership. What solution does your book propose? the Australian prime ministership, and the complexity of Macron in France and Justin Trudeau in Canada. So what we have is a complicated series of discussions whereby, in the old days, the argument used to be that people would simply act in their own best self-interest. But these days, of course, that’s not occurring. What Brexit and Trump show are that the very people who do not gain from a Brexit, the very people who actually lose from a Trump in the presidency, are the people who voted for these things. And that’s because particular dog whistles and particular levers were pulled in the discussion: racism, xenophobia, immigration, border walls and so forth. Therefore, when you create an enemy within that is not an enemy, you are blocking, deflecting, masking a discussion of many of the real and important events, which are about the economy, the political economy, social justice and the redistribution of wealth. We’re not having these conversations. Instead, we’re talking about a wall, or we’re talking about subsidies for Cornish cream, so we’re picking very minor issues and rendering them very large. The solution is education. The characteristic of the people who voted for Donald Trump is that they were the least educated members of the US. The people who voted for Brexit, similarly, were in some of the poorest areas of the UK, and also many were men and women who didn’t have the opportunity of a university education. So, it is actually a conversation about education, about ensuring that citizens have media literacy and information literacy, and therefore aren’t taking composite news, press releases and tweets as facts, and that they actually have the context, intellectual experience and expertise to seek out information and interpret it. I don’t use the phrase ‘fake news’. I think it’s used once in the book in inverted commas. What I’m interested in is citizens having a diverse range of information sources and ideas, and having the information literacy to be able to make up their minds. But we live in an age now where reading is optional. My former books, The University of Google and Digital Dieting, to name just a couple, are about this and make the case very clearly. We live in an age of ignorance. We live in an era of fear, and that’s simply because people are not getting beyond themselves. We live in intensely selfish times, Instagram times. We assess who we are by our capacity to get likes on Facebook, and loves on Instagram. Well, how about you read something rather than take another picture of yourself? In practical terms, how do you propose that this education take place? Teach information and media literacy in schools, and teach information and media literacy in universities. It was my great privilege when I was teaching in the UK at the University of Brighton, that I was involved in implementing information literacy programs throughout the university, including in the Brighton and Sussex Medical School for first-year medical students. And I think that’s quite important, because patients are coming to surgeries in the UK and Australia and elsewhere having put something into Dr Google and hoping for the best. So we can pretend that Google doesn’t exist, or we can actually enable our medical students, who then become medical graduates and then doctors, to have those information literacy skills, to understand what their patients are finding, and enabling their patients to have higher levels of information literacy. So without a doubt in my mind, what we need to be focusing on is enhancing, improving and lifting the standards that we expect at schools, the standards that we expect at universities. We need to be increasing the amount of reading we all do, from students to citizens, and demanding more of all of us as citizens. If you breathe, you have rights, but if you breathe, you also have a responsibility to read, think and understand what’s happening in the world beyond. Because this becomes a political issue, are you expecting any pushback? I’m not bothered about pushback at all. My late husband and I are old political operatives, so I’m not remotely bothered or concerned about what people on the extreme right or the religious right might have to say about me or anybody else. I’m not terribly bothered at all about what anybody says on Twitter. The advantage of being a scholar who’s worked in nine universities in four countries is that anything I could have seen, I have We live in intensely selfish times, Instagram times ... Well, how about you read something rather than take another picture of yourself? seen. Anything that could have been said has been said. So, with the greatest respect, the whole point of being an academic is debate, discussion and taking alternative views. And what I’m interested in, and what I’m committed to, is reading, thinking and writing. And I read a great deal. I write a great deal. My 20th book is about to be published, so I’m not mucking about here. I’m very comfortable with pushback. I’m very comfortable with discourse, dialogue and debate. I’m sure a lot of it will be coated in sexism, as we see so frequently on the planet at the moment. And so, as I always say, just bring it. ■ 11