Jakson Trust Literacy: How Do You Know What's Real Anymore:? täydellinen litterointi

that Hamish he didn't win her trust with one enormous, ridiculous lie in quick succession. He actually built this lie slowly and convincingly over a large amount of time. 18 months, conversation after conversation, explanation after explanation over months and months and months. And during our chat, Tracy said many things that were incredibly on point. But one thing that she did say is that we do. We f we teach financial literacy and digital literacy, but nobody teaches us trust literacy, who to trust, what to trust, as I said, where to where to trust, why and how we can learn these skills. And I really think that she's She's onto something because sophisticated manipulation these days, it doesn't necessarily arrive raising a red flag, I should say. It it can sometimes arrive raising hundreds of beige ones or even hundreds of green ones. ⁓ so we've really got to dig deep into this conversation, I think, my friends, because seeing just isn't believing anymore. Now it makes me think as well of a case ⁓ that you may have heard of last year of a Hong Kong. Businessman that really articulates how much times have changed. He was an employee at a multinational company in Hong Kong when he received a request relating to a confidential financial transaction. And he was initially a bit suspicious. And so he joined what appeared to be a large video conference call with multiple colleagues ⁓ that he believed were real. So if you think about that. He's actually seen something suspicious or concerned. He's actually taken steps to try and verify and validate it and seek confirmation. Except the verification process that he was involved in was actually a sophisticated scam. It was all part of the deception. Deep fake technology was used to impersonate every single other person on that call, people who he believed he knew. And ultimately he was deceived into making transfers to the equivalent of 25 million US dollars to these scammers. So it's a really, really good example of a shift that I think we all need to remember. And that's that verification itself can now be totally manufactured. Now it doesn't mean that we panic every time we're on Teams, even though Teams is of course very stressful sometimes. It means that, you know, the stakes continue to be high. And I guess for us, trust shouldn't depend on one key signal that we're used to relying upon. If somebody asks to transfer a significant amount of money or for you to hand over sensitive information or private data to grant access to an account, we have to start asking those questions of not only does this look real, but how do I independently know that this is true or this is a real request? Things that we can do. Perhaps we could call the person ⁓ on a number that's already familiar and validated. We could contact an organization directly through the details that we have found ourselves, not those that have been provided to us. At work, we can make sure that significant financial decisions require more than one person's apparent approval. That's a really, really great thing to do. Now, we've of course always had scams, and misinformation is not something that is real, in fact, it's you know, centuries old. AI didn't invent deception, but it does change the game in terms of speed, in terms of scale, in terms of sophistication and personalization, and I guess the cost of producing something truly believable these days. Now I mentioned ScamWatch earlier. They are warning Australians about, in particular, investment scams using AI generated deepfakes of celebrities and of public figures. ⁓ through things like ads, because an ad can just look legitimate. ⁓ it can, you know, look like a news article. ⁓ it can lead to a very professional looking spoof website or trading platform. ⁓ the celebrity can be fake. ⁓ the endorsement is obviously fake and the apparent returns, of course, are often ⁓ very fictitious. Increasingly anyone can manufacture a face. a voice, the document, the website, the social proof, and even the new evidence that we use, I guess, to become to to suspect when something is suspicious. It's becoming so accessible and so easy for anyone to do. Now think about that in the context of Tracy's story. And this is the important one, a romance scam. Now give someone very skilled in manipulating trust and the ability to create convincing identities and those images and documents and voices and personalized communication at scale, which again can just be pulled so easily from our social media profiles, the things that we willingly share on the internet. ⁓ and imagine how powerful that is, a person that is a sophisticated con man with all of these additional tools. And that's why I think. You know, in listening to Tracy's story and in pondering this myself, one of the most ⁓ dangerous attitudes, I guess, that all of us can carry into this AI era is, I'd never fall for that. And that's something that I think many of us in our minds or in our hearts have probably said once or twice when we see these sorts of situations occur. You know, being intelligent is of course useful, but believing that you're too intelligent to fall for a scam. or to be manipulated is a grave error. Now, this isn't just about protecting your bank account. You know, I think in the end we're making decisions all day based on certain bits of information. If it's our health, should I take HRT? Is that supplement safe? Is this investment legitimate? Is that breaking news clip real? Did that person actually say what they're looking like they're saying on that on that Instagram reel? ⁓ or is this study that I'm reading actually credible? And social media has done something really strange to the way that we process this expertise in many ways. On our phone, we've got a specialist physician, we've got a conspiracy theorist, we've got a government health department, we've got a professor who spent 30 years researching something bloody amazing and a bloke selling mushroom powder.

and they can all occupy exactly the same. space and time on that little rectangle in our pockets. The interface of a phone and this sort of technology has kind of flattened authority and popularity in terms of views and followers can start to seem like credibility. And that's particularly important again when it comes to things like our health, as I mentioned. Our feeds are totally full of advice, particularly if you're a woman of a certain age. About things like perimenopause, about hormones and mental health and supplements and fertility and ADHD and autism and sleep and aging. Some of these clinicians creating that content are really excellent. ⁓ And social media has made that valuable expertise ever more valuable. But someone sounding authoritative isn't evidence. Neither is having the word doctor in a username, because there are many different types of doctors. ⁓ and even if somebody is genuinely a physical health doctor or physician, that doesn't automatically make them an expert in the particular area that they're talking about. So we've got to think a bit more critically to challenge, to be curious about the sort of information that we're viewing here. Now, the World Health Organization reviewed research into health misinformation and found that it can affect real world health. Behaviors, including vaccine history and the use of unproven treatments. And I think we've seen that a lot through the COVID pandemic. But even now, with different ⁓ you know, health supplements, things like peptides that people are buying off the internet that they can't test that they don't know are effective and they're injecting into their bodies. So, you know, we have to think a little bit about that. Who recommends asking some very basic questions about? Health information online. And those are, you know, who produced this video? Are they actually an expert in that subject matter? ⁓ where is the evidence to prove that? Is it current or is it from five, 10 years ago? ⁓ do other credible sources agree? And is somebody trying to sell you something? That's something that our spidey senses all need to sort of go off on. That last one, you know, it is, it's really, really important because it asks not only if the person is credible, but what happens financially if I believe in them? Are they selling that supplement that fixes the problem that they've just convinced you that you actually have? ⁓ does the frightening claim lead directly to their course consultation or product funnel? You know, you can usually see it if we stop and slow down just for a little bit to really start to think about what's going on underneath the hood. You know, commercial involvement doesn't automatically make someone dishonest, but incentive is of course information and followers, of course, as I've said, are not a peer review. We have to think about incentives with all of this. Because a lot of the time our brains through these processes, they get a little bit hacked. And that's another

reason that this is difficult. The vulnerability isn't just the technology, it's us. Tracy and I in our conversation, we discussed the concept of social engineering in that episode. And social engineering is the manipulation of our cognitive biases in order to get us to perform an action or a task. ⁓ so instead of hacking a computer, you manipulate the human operating it. You use authority and urgency and fear and attraction and greed and familiarity and trust to get someone to act. Misinformation works. on so many of those same vulnerabilities. Our emotions are sometimes our biggest weaknesses. And as human beings, we are in many ways the weakest link in terms of of scams and hacking that can happen. So just for a moment, think about the last thing you immediately perhaps sent to a friend. You probably didn't share it because you traced the claim and done the analysis on the original source and checked the evidence. You probably shared it 'cause it was funny. Or it was frightening, or it was outrageous, or useful, or helpful, or it felt like you were connected through it in some way. Or because it made you think I knew it. It confirmed something that you believed. That's a human trait, but it's also very exploitable. Sometimes the information ⁓ that we're most vulnerable to isn't information that's the most believable. It's the information that we most want to believe. That's why trust literacy isn't only about understanding other people's information. It's also so much about understanding ourselves, what makes us really easy to persuade? When does our verification threshold drop or does it exist at all with certain people? And what makes us stop asking important questions and interrogating? So I want to bring in things like a trust check for all of us to start thinking about. And so to make that Practical. You know, we need to remember we don't need to fact check every single piece of content that we encounter. Nobody has time for that. Instead, ⁓ I like to use a fairly simple rule. The greater the consequence, the higher the verification threshold. It could mean something that. materially affects your your health, your money, your career safety, your reputation, your relationships, or even your vote, very importantly at this point in time in this country and around the world. So we need to slow down, as I said, and ask five questions. The first is who actually said this comment, ⁓ you know, shared this meme, ⁓ picture, whatever it might be. Don't stop at whoever reposted it. If there's a screenshot of a headline ⁓ find the original news article, go off platform. If it's a short clip, find the full interview. If somebody says research shows, then go and find the research if you can. Go upstream. Now, of course, this takes time, but it's about a habit. It's about making sure that we're training our brains not to believe everything that we see and to take steps to verify what is fact and what is fiction. The second is what is the evidence? Is it

data? ⁓ that has a peer-reviewed study? Is it expert opinion or is it an anecdote or a graph with no source attributed to it? And does the evidence actually support the size of the claim that's being made? Third, who else independently confirms what you're seeing or hearing? 100 accounts repeating the same claim isn't a hundred sources of credibility. They're one source with excellent distribution who have probably made the same mistake you might make. Leave the page you're on and see what credible independent news sources say. And of course, in Australia, we've got some incredible ⁓ independent news outlets. ⁓ if you're not following them already, women's agenda, the daily oz, cheek media. There's some really, really great organizations that are are doing some fantastic independent work in this field. Fourth, and this is a big one, what is it making you feel when you see that post, that image, that video? Is it Fear, is it urgency? Is it jealousy? Is it outrage? ⁓ you know, a strong emotion in the end doesn't mean the information is false, but it is a key factor in misinformation sharing, the repetition of emotional ⁓ and emotionally reactive content, rage bait, for example, you might have heard before. So if you're feeling all the feels, then that should increase your verification threshold, not decrease it. And fifth. What would change my mind about this? So don't only look for evidence that's proving your position. Look for the ones that are contrary to your position. We all suffer from a thing called confirmation bias where we seek out information that will confirm our point of view. So ask yourself what credible evidence would convince you that you're wrong and genuinely go and look for it. Now, there are a couple of really great places that you can do some good fact checking. ⁓ They are definitely worth knowing. So in Australia, I've mentioned ScamWatch. That's where I'd start with scams and suspicious activity, especially around things like romance scams or investment offers. ⁓ AAP fact check as well is useful for checking claims and seeing if evidence that people are sharing is actually credible. For health start closer to Authoritative sources like the World Health Organization, Australian Federal and State Health Authorities, recognize specialists and medical bodies and associations and qualified clinicians where their qualifications are relevant to their field of work, importantly. For public claims, if you're in places like the United States, polyfact, factcheck.org is really fantastic. ⁓ are established resources. And even Google Fact Checker Explorer can also help you see where professional fact checkers have already investigated a particular claim. So you don't need one magical website that tells you what to think. I think what I'm sharing with you is that this is a triangulation style skill. I've talked a bit about slowing it down, but I just want to slow it down a little bit now to really focus on this. I think we really need to

deliberately reintegrate friction into our lives, especially when it comes to the digital world. Technology companies have spent years removing it, you know, one click purchasing, instant transfers, autofill, face ID, you know, seamless, seamless, absolutely everything. And usually that's fantastic, but sometimes friction does actually protect us and we must remember that. If somebody asks you to transfer a significant amount of money, You know, we need to slow down and think about that to have the skills to independently verify what they're asking us to do. If your boss sends you an unusual request, you know, again, call them on that number that you already know. Don't have anything sent to you that you're actually going to use. Go with what you go what go with what you know. If a health claim is going to change what you put in your body, so, so importantly. ⁓ don't base that decision on one person in your feed or a social media influencer that says that they've had a great time with this particular peptide. If a bro, you know, a breaking news clip, as I mentioned before, makes you really upset and really furious and really sad and emotional and angry, don't become part of that distribution network until you verify that what you're seeing is actually real. And importantly, If anybody is pushing you to act fast, to act right now, that is an absolute red flag to slow right down. In an information environment designed for speed, sometimes the most intelligent thing that you can do is to wait. We tell women, I think a lot of the time as well, to trust their gut ⁓ and that intuition is really important. And of course it it really matters. It's one of the great human skills that we have, particularly when it comes to things like personal safety. If something feels unsafe, you don't need a peer-reviewed study before removing yourself from a situation. But factual claims are different. We've got to be able to separate our feelings from what is real and true. So when we're talking about money, health, our identity, AI-generated content, I think we do need another layer to that intuition discussion. Trust your gut, of course, but always verify with the evidence to support what you're feeling. Because the person trying to manipulate you, you know, they may be deliberately designing an experience that actually feels trustworthy. And it's really difficult to tell the difference sometimes. That's what Tracy's story really reminds us of. She was not stupid. She was not gullible. She was dealing with ⁓ an experienced con man and somebody who. was extraordinarily skilled at manipulating human emotion and human trust. So I'd rather have a system ⁓ than an ego, I guess, when it comes to these sorts of issues. Tracy said trust is a skill. And I think she's absolutely right. In an era of generative AI, deep fakes, synthetic identities, you know, algorithmic feeds and influencers and platforms and scammers and mis and disinformation. It might become one of the most important skills that we ever have. Because protecting humans in the AI era isn't just about building safer technology. It's also about preserving our ability to think, to question, to verify, and to decide what deserves our trust. We don't need to become more cynical, but we do need to become more discerning. Open enough to trust, skilled enough to verify. That My friends is trust literacy. Thanks for listening, First Mover. I'll see you next time. That's it for today's episode of the First Movers podcast. If this hit home for you or you think someone else needs to hear it, share it and subscribe. That's genuinely how this show grows and how these conversations reach the people who need the most. Keep an eye on yasminlondon.com or follow me on LinkedIn and Instagram, and I'll drop the links in the show notes. Until next time, be first, be brave, and be a first mover.