 to this session about one of the most debated issues this time which is post-truth and how can leaders from all sectors of society can restore trust and collaboration and also I can say fight fake news, fight disinformation and restore also the importance of truth in our societies. So we have a great panel today. I will begin with my colleague YGL Bernice Ang. She's principal and methodology lead of Seroth Lab Singapore. She's a young global leader as I told you. And she has a background of psychology studies and also science and data. Please a big applause for Bernice. Here in my right is Felipe Stefan. He's principal of investments on media network USA. He structures and manages investments in Latin America as part of a media network governance and citizen engagement initiative. He leads the firm's effort to advance civic technology, independent media, open data and fiscal governance in the region. In the context of this role, Felipe is a member in the board of directors of IMCO and NOSA's SIDADES and observer of the board of collab.re and a member of the board of advisors of techado.com which is one of the leading Argentinian media outlets fighting fake news. And a applause for Felipe please. And a Chilean politician, Felipe Casomerhoff is member of Congress, also a young global leader and he's also a presidential candidate for the next election in this year. He's also he's represented Santiago for this period. He's an economist and from 2011 and 2017 he was the presidential delegate for Chilean reconstruction after the earthquake. He was also minister of social development and now he's running for president. And a applause for Felipe. Things you want to share please begin to think about this post truth. So I will begin asking Felipe Cast, how is politics changing because of post truth and fake news? And because we had in Chilean episode, our first we can say massive episode of post truth and fake news with the fires in the summer where through social media there was a viralization of content saying fake things like Mapuche's were behind this attack. So Felipe how is politics changing in our country in the region because of this? And especially now that we have an electoral year in Chile. Well first of all thank you everybody to be here. I will say it's changing a lot because now you have politicians that instead of trying to win with their deep ideas many are trying to win elections in the short run just bringing emotions into the game. So actually you know that you have the technology to know what each single person feels about everything. And that is a complicated story because you need a lot of effort in order to compete in that field. I can know from Facebook from media like what do you feel and I can directly cheat to you saying what you want to listen. And you can create these clusters of people. It used to be the case that we get information through kind of the media traditional media so the journalists people like you used to be the filter in order to realize what is true what is not true. But now obviously that's not the case. So we face this dilemma and everybody's tempted in politics to cheat a little bit. That's why you really need political parties and you need a new kind of type of journalist that are doing what probably Felipe is trying to do. And I am optimistic about the future because I'm sure that you can lie to people one time or two time. But eventually everybody will realize that actually in this new scenario you need to get more prepared more informed. And therefore you need to create this new type of leadership that is really kind of deep in terms of their principles their ideas why you're doing what you're doing what is your view. And at the end of the day everything is going to turn. OK. That's my hope that eventually people are smart enough to realize through social media what is true and what is not true. Right now we are that kind of in the transition moment and hopefully this will happen soon. And Felipe have you suffered so far in your presidential candidacy fake news episodes or not yet. Yes actually there was there was a book written about my family very sad kind of trying to mix information and you deal with that. You have to confront that. The worst thing you can do right now is hide your head under the floor. You really have to be very straightforward. The good thing is actually everybody is very open to get your point of view. And you have the channels to really open your point of view in a very transparent way. So what do you may think is something bad to you because someone is attacking you. Eventually it may turn out to be really good. OK. So at the end people would value you being there straightforward and then clarifying the information. Felipe Stefan your foundation has done enormous work in this field and also by funding important projects that are fighting fake news disinformation hate speech and you told me that you have given one hundred million dollars to fight for this issue for this fighting this. So what's your perspective. I mean your point of view is that what is important is to support media outlets and organizations working to restore truth. Yeah. Thanks Paula. Delighted to be part of this conversation and of course to all of you in the room. Good morning and to all of you watching on live stream. Good morning as well. I might say a couple of things that are controversial. So I want to make sure that everyone has my Twitter handle so that you can criticize me amply and say that I am wrong as many times as you would like. So at Felipe Stefan hashtag fake news you can send all your hate speech over there. But but yeah to your question and thanks for bringing this up. Oh media network is a philanthropic investment firm that has been working on the fields of independent media and good governance for about 10 years and we made an announcement yesterday that we will be committing one hundred million dollars to boost journalism fight fake news and fight hate speech online and very excited about the possibility of what we can do with that kind of funding not only all around the world through networks that are already there but also promoting new initiatives in places like Latin America. I think I'm delighted we're having this conversation. I think this conversation is incredibly timely but the act of lying and the act of the powerful to manipulate information is nothing new that has always been the case historically. There's always been ways in which to manipulate existing channels and dynamics. I think going to what Felipe was saying the complexity and the sophistication of the issue has become a lot more than what we've seen in the past because of some of the dynamics that social media creates whether it's filter bubbles or whether it's the ability to promote misinformation in a way that appears for it to be trustful. And so let me make a statement that hopefully will lead us on into a robust conversation is that democratic systems fail in the absence of trust. There is no way in which society in which there's absolutely no trust to public institutions and to media can truly function in the way that it should. The reality of it is that the causes of the mistrust, the very high mistrust that we see today between citizens and public institutions sometimes rightfully so, those causes are oftentimes not quite as dangerous at what happens in the absence in the full void of trust because those with powerful interest, those with the ability to manipulate and sophisticate the tools that we have today to connect with one another will be very smart at using them to promote their own interests. And so it is only whether we start promoting the ability for institutions to deserve the trust of citizens for media to be able to innovate in the way that it goes about storytelling for philanthropy to be able to promote initiatives that build bridges across different groups that will be able to start getting into the dynamics of trust necessary to make sure that we can pursue social impact. Thanks Felipe. And Bernice, as Felipe says this post truth sounds really for me like an euphemism like it's a lie right I mean it's being there for ages so but what's new now is that people through social media would viralize these lies and that people will believe that that's what happened in the in the American election and what happened in Chile's fires that people will begin like intelligent smart people will begin to believe that really Mapuche's where you know firing the country and things like that that's the the danger right so why is the case Bernice that people begin to believe this without any kind of filter information that's coming from no media outlet and it's coming from anybody like oh what's up like what's up group said you know this is happening here so why is people believing this right well good morning to everyone both here and online thanks for having me that's a really good question and I'm going to throw in a behavioral lens to this so in psychology or cognitive science there's there's this thing that's unpopularized by Daniel Kahneman now called systems system one and system two thinking or the book title is thinking fast and slow right but what does that mean system one or thinking fast is the immediate response that we feel or that we experience as an emotion when we see something right but it's it's the one that comes to us most easily it's not system two which is the deliberative thoughtful like hang on what is what is this person saying what are the facts here is this is this for real right so evolutionarily we are primed to to think on systems one basis because that's what helps us survive if there's something you better be quick to react even if it's if it's wrong in the end but you err on the side of caution but in this sense we have now in this case we've been in this function has been used in information manipulation such that not only are we being fed a lot of different types of data but the kind of data that's become more viral is the one that appeals to system one thinking more and among the different emotions that that stimulates anger is one of those are very immediate ones and so an anger happens to be the emotion of populism too so there's no surprise why this is what we are seeing now and this is what is most viral at the time yeah very interesting thinking one and two so uh how is uh I mean from the point of view of media and from the point of view of politics this is a question for for the three of you how do you I mean what kind of solutions we have we have to create solutions we have to find a way besides you know picking up as Felipe is saying or funding media outlets or trying to support people fact checking and all that but what do we do in order to educate people or to fight this so that we don't have you know as an outcome populism as you said so Felipe Felipe Felipe one Felipe two sure I'm happy to go I so so you're asking me how to solve yeah the problem of trust around the world we get done let me let me try to give some solutions and hopefully those spark a conversation and and again to the audience feel free to feel free to question those to me that the crisis of trust is a crisis of representation and the crisis of trust is a crisis of listening we've gotten far too used to debating rather than dialoguing it's easier to express what our view for an issue is that rather than actively listening and like Bernice was saying going making the over step of going out of our comfort zone and actually understanding the implications of the information that we're given so I think there is definitely a role for organizations not only to practice but to also promote efforts for active listening both at the individual level and also in terms of organizations and in terms of how we debate I think we also need to increase web literacy I think oftentimes people say that the crisis of trust online has to do with the lack of news literacy but I actually think it's the lack of web literacy it's not that you take one piece of information that is in front of you and based on what is on that page you decide whether it's true or not but actually that you're able to look at the other sources to look at the history to be able to take that piece of information and run it into a search engine and to actually take the effort necessary to understand how valid is that piece of information and that requires web literacy and as we continue to bridge the digital divide increasing web literacy and be able to promote that will be a big part of fighting against fake news. I think the other thing is that in philanthropy we have to provide funding and support to organizations that are bridging cultural divides and that and that could be in many cases so for example in the case of government the reality is that it is the onus of trust towards government is on government institutions it's not a problem of the citizens that they don't like government it's actually on the government to warrant that trust and so can we promote government efficiency can we provide through civic technology promote the modernization of government so that it's most likely to warrant trust the same thing with media media is in a in a deep crisis a deep crisis profits of advertising revenue and at the moment in which we most would need media to be able to serve as an arbitrary in relation to that trust between citizens and institutions media is at its at the moment of most crisis and so how is it that we could break through a public sphere of information I think it has a lot to do with being able to promote and support media both in experimenting on financial sustainability models but also on experimenting on creative ways for multimedia storytelling we're seeing for example on fact checking that very boring long articles related to fact checking don't really get anywhere no one wants to read that but the use of humor and and gifts for example to promote fact checks is actually getting to a far greater reach so is there a way that we can break through that noise through innovations and multimedia storytelling and then perhaps one one last one is building the capacity of citizens and of civil society to use data and to use technology tools in a far more sophisticated manner because the reality is that we live in a world in which powerful interests already know how to use those tools and as sophisticated of a manner and oftentimes with civil society and with average citizens we're always catching up and so what happens is that as I was saying earlier those in power have lied many times before but now they're doing it in a more sophisticated manner using social media we are also as users using social media in a much more sophisticated manner but we're never quite catching up and so I think anything we can do to promote capacity building efforts for citizens and civil society to be able to really think about sophisticated and innovative uses of the tools we have available today would probably go a long way so hope yeah I don't know how far I got but hope that that's useful as a journalist and editor I have to say that even though a lot of media outlets have a crisis in the business model after the the the US election there's being a boom in subscriptions the New York Times is doing Greek word New Yorker you know Washington Post so there's there's a vitality because you know journalism is now more important than ever so this the two sides of the of the coin right one hand there's a crisis in the business model that's true but on the other hand I think that journalism is now to the public clearly one thing that is really really important to go through this phase and I want to ask Felipe because is it harder now to be a politician and to be a presidential candidate I mean in the sense that before you had of course all the exposure to normal media we can go and say classic media going through all your you know everything in your life in previous life and your current life but now you also have this the possibility of being you know mistreated through social media with things that are not true so how is it are you super brave no it requires some kind of hero no no no actually let me let me answer shortly before your previous question what to do and I think we there's nothing to do I mean everything is going to sort out well eventually and I think if you and the the crisis of trust that you were mentioning I think has two sides one is obviously that everybody can get news that are completely fake which I think is the easier part to solve because everybody as I was saying before you start kind of meaningless um you're going you start being kind of more skeptical about the information you get so every person as a rational you might mean will realize how to really get to the real story and even in the case of Mapuche's in Chile eventually everybody knew that actually was fake so as you were saying journalists everything is about reputation right so the game of reputation is very important and everybody even a politician has to play that game if you want to really get everybody to trust that you have nice ideas and actually you are there for the right reasons you must be careful about your reputation so about what to do I'm not that worried about what to do I think everybody bottom up not top down will solve that problem but we do have another problem which is the the crisis of trust is coming from the fact that some institutions and some people are actually behaving really bad and therefore these institutions and those guys who were kind of leaders in the traditional way are getting less and less trusted by the people so if you want to solve that there's only one way to solve that behave well and be kind of aware that it's not only about making profits it's not only about kind of looking at yourself as the center of the universe but you are playing a game that is more complex with more people everybody's watching at you so the way to solve this problem is first I'm not that worried about this kind of misinformation because eventually everybody knows what's going on and the puzzle is what happened in the United States why even though everybody knew that actually many of the things that actually Trump was saying were not true he won and that is a is a very nice puzzle and my feeling is that he won for different reasons not because he was lying but because everybody was very angry about the other option that is my call on why in a more systematic way because what I'm telling you is that this kind of game of flying it won't last forever but in the case of Trump in some way it worked and my point of view is that everybody was very angry about the establishment and therefore that was very in favor of Trump and moreover he used technology in a way that was very smart and now everybody's going to use it so probably it won't be a competitive and that that's for everybody and that easy and is it harder now to be a politician in this context or no I think it's fun it's I mean you can you can really talk in a more transparent way I don't need to call a journalist a big kind of journalist to ask for an interview you can really everything up is about the content even in my campaign group we talk every Monday in the meeting and we always think about the content everything is about the content and about reputation um so it is harder because you need to you get a lot of accusations some of them are not true but as I was saying um even when they attack you you can use it as an opportunity to show what you really believe so all the channels are open so I think it's actually easier today to be a politician than what it used to be because you must in the previously in order to be a politician you need to have a lot of money you need to be really kind of from establishment now the barriers are lower so the market is more open for new ideas and Bernice uh from the perspective of increasing web literacy and and and helping people to go from thinking one to two I mean to have more reflection what can we do this is uh fundamentally a culture change question I think and culture change takes time so I was actually kind of struck by something that Felipe said earlier that as long as people behave then you know the system will will act as as according um but one of my concerns is also with the American system where if if good behavior were to reward support why are we seeing this kind of asymmetrical uh force happening asymmetrical dynamic where citizens are still supporting Trump despite him uh saying blatant lies so this brings this is actually a concern that I have about a culture of accepting lies well I mean fake news is is part of that it's another way to describe it but it's a culture of saying that okay yeah he's just going about his thing and that's just him that's just Trump and that is the kind of thing that will break down uh democracy it breaks down the forces that keep uh uh democratic forces active as they should so this is also which means that this is a chicken and egg right where do you start first you change the behavior of the politicians first or you improve the discerning uh capacity of citizens first uh of course the answer is both have to happen but where in the absence of good behavior then ground up movements have all the more potential and opportunity to create the shift uh to turn that around okay so now we are going to open the floor for comments and questions I would only ask you to be very very brief so that everyone can have the chance to to make a question to the panelists or to to comment or to debate we have micro so yeah here please there's I'm sorry that I'm giving you my back but I saw a fascinating interview the other day with five Trump voters and they were asked you know do you are you upset that the president lies to you and they were all upset that he lied but more upset that he wasted his time talking about Arnold Schwarzenegger ratings of his tv show things like that and what they and just to reinforce what you were talking about Felipe was that the idea that uh they want to see goods delivered to them they said we're happy to we will accept all of his BS on social media as long as the jobs come and I thought that was quite encouraging because ultimately it was about results but then there's the other side of the story the fact that this kind of extreme speech on social media encourages groups within society that otherwise would remain quite quiet and and not so active and I think that's one of the things that that worries me the most because it provides an outlet for those groups which they wouldn't have otherwise and I think we're seeing it not just in the United States but across the world right now so I'd like to hear your reactions to that thanks so much and we are receiving questions and comments in Spanish and English and Portuguese so there's translation so please uh so your comments and then we are going to have different questions here while our panelists can address the the comment and the question Felipe I I think that that's exactly right and thank you for for that comment and that question and going back to what Felipe was saying um it is true that it's about the ability for government to deliver um the the reality of it is that when I speak about the crisis of trust being a crisis of representation and a crisis of listening is because citizens feel that government doesn't understand their needs and is in well position to actually deliver on addressing those needs that what makes me hopeful about that is that problems that government has faced are age old and still remain willingness for corruption uh tendency to mismanagement uh inefficiency but some of the tools that we have today to be able to address those problems are actually much more effective and sophisticated than ever before and so I I'm hopeful that things like civic technology will allow governments to start listening to citizens better um we're seeing it all around the world certainly in latin america organizations like uh colab are providing a platform for government to be able to in real time listen to citizens and respond to citizens um I think that uh we're seeing that for example in places like brazil where participatory budgeting was born where at the very local level citizens are able to participate in determining what the budget for their community the investment budget of their community should be going to so that it truly is most likely to address their needs and so I think that's that's exactly right you cannot sell a box of chocolates that has no chocolate so at some point at some point someone will open the box and will realize there's no chocolates here so the the true ultimate solution to that crisis of trust will be for governments to be able to deliver because trust is not the problem trust is the symptom of the broader issue thank you we're going to take three comments in a row and so then the panel will address three philx yes present yourself please yes my name is philx maradiaga i'm a young global leader well actually alumni now and i run a always young global leaders forever um since 2009 um thank you for this fascinating discussion i would like to hear your comments regarding uh what could be the role of those of us who are in the policy world in the academia think tanks to actually connect with people at the grassroots so uh for in my case i work all around uh lat america but particularly in central america and it's becoming increasingly hard to to to really counter the wave of populism precisely because the the way in which populist communicate with the majority of the people seems to be more effective in terms of persuading and for those of us who do as i said policy research and try to persuade is becoming increasingly hard what are some of your comments regarding the role of academia and think tanks uh encountering populism in latin america thank you and there we have elia selman please thank you uh i'm elia selman from america economia i'm i'm gonna ask i want to write my comment in spanish since most of the people here speak better spanish than english uh i would like to know the reaction of the panel to the following i believe that the current post true truth reality is something invented also by the media it's nothing new in general when the political environment in a society reaches high polarization levels this is exactly what happens i think we realize this because it happened in the us which is the time that one has seen the highest degree of polarization and we have a president in the u.s who attacks the media in latin america we know that correa does it every day christina fernandez attacked the media every day and it was full of lies at times of a popular unit in chile there were no social media but there were rumors and people said water will come to them there will be no water tomorrow and everybody started gathering water so don't you think we are overvaluing and confusing the environment that there is social media that the media is changing but in fact this is not a new phenomenon thank you very much and let's take the third comment and the panel will take all these very interesting comments and answer i am an avatars the minister women's ministry in paraguay i understand exactly what's being explained and i go a little beyond this and i would like to comment on this question of the rumors the question of social media this rumor means that we go with a few concepts or demonizations of some topics and we lead society backwards and why do i say this now we have a demonization of the gender ideal and anything related to gender is looked at twisted and we criticize even if we don't know what we are referring to the question of social media i won't talk about the press but the last thing we read is what we consider the truth i read wikipedia and we all read wikipedia and we take it and believe in it as truth and really the contributions are very good it's very helpful but it is worrying because rumors who become viral on the media are taken as the truth and certain positions are adopted but nowadays we are going backwards in the advancement of women globally philly big yes um so about the role of the the academia um how to fight populism remember that populism always use kind of three tricks in order to get what they want the first one is that they want to divide the society in terms of those who are the good guys and the bad guys the second step of populism is that is that they the populist guy said i want to save you from the bad guys because i am a good guy once the populist is in power he wants to change the rules of the game in order to remain in power forever so if if you ask me what to do in order to fight populism actually nowadays it's easier to fight populism in terms of being very direct the problem is that think tanks many times stay in their desks writing papers and they never tell you a story they don't go further in order to kind of translate a paper an investigation a research into a story and we need human beings stories since we're kids so um that's kind of the missing link if you want to really fight populism and and when i go to universities i invited many times with guys from the very extreme left to debate most of the time i start a conversation with with the students saying please um always when a politician like me starts saying something be skeptical um critical view of everything try to think twice we're very good about telling that we are the savers uh that we are Jesus that are going to save the world so so be careful about those guys and when you start saying that everything else goes very nice and and and so my invitation is to be very brave about being straightforward about what do you think every single element and what you were saying uh minister about now that the social media is everything is kind of taking as truth it's not so true that because i'm being attacked many times um in many different situations and then i have like in 30 minutes i can put on my my cell phone and i can say what i think about it and i can post it on twitter or facebook and everybody will know my view the problem and you're right if you don't react quickly if you if you keep saying oh this is not important it would be viral then then you're really in a big problem but if you really take seriously this massive conversation i don't see as a big problem bernice what are your views about this and especially about what the minister was saying about some like gender issues being trolled on on social media so there are consequences there right yeah of course um so i apologize because i didn't understand i think two of the comments in spanish are questions yeah i couldn't get it um so i'll just respond to your question um in terms of trolling online it seems like there is a certain set of behavior that happens online that is maybe facilitated by anonymity that is different from when you have person to person interactions so i wonder if there could actually be a greater link between what happens online to how we relate to each other as people and this is essentially again culture shift right because the kind of trolling that you see online the kind of things that people say about women about LGBT minority groups uh is is really quite appalling and also stuff that you may not see as much in person because when when we interact anthropologically as people when we interact in in in person format um there are there are things that we that we would not say as easily or as casually that may hurt another person's feelings to the extent that it does online so then what are those mechanics that we have when we are in person the kind of trust the kind of goodwill as the starting point instead of aggression aggression as a starting point okay then we have one comment here and then the guard the house man okay thank you uh Felipe i would like to go back please present yourself briefly um my name is alex scalia i'm a journalist and i've been handling uh corporate communications for a while um you were talking about uh web literacy as one of the most important uh tools to fight the the post through uh my point is on the algorithms because uh it in in a way social media facebook twitter tend to put together the same kind of messages you are uh sending to the world and so how to fight back that because if you're talking about uh web literacy uh it you i would think on getting diverse opinions and social media tend to put together all the same kind of stuff and so we are talking about we need to learn people need to have access to different views but all the tools put them just seeing the same thing and this is why i see uh the you you have trolls and you have all those these organized movements uh growing to attack a certain party or person or whatever thank you Ricardo i have a Ricardo houseman from harvard university i have a question for Felipe cast you said that people what in the end they want is the government to deliver and i i want to question that do they want the government to deliver or do you want the government to represent or to create the nation that they think they are or they want to be so so you know when obama was elected it was this great excitement of we finally are one big nation there's not red america blue america there's not black america there's not white america there's a united states of america and in in some sense trump says no no listen guys if we are we know who we are we know who we are we are not latinos right and we're not muslims right so we know who we are and and so so this is the country is for us not for them and and so i'll put a wall i'll put a band etc because that's who we are as a nation so i don't need to deliver on complicated public services i'm i'm delivering on this sense of who we are and another one and then we answer microphone there please raise your hand thanks i'm carolina i'm a global shaper from ballerizonte hub brazil you said a bit about web literacy and i wanted you to discuss like what's our role on getting the whole point of view the whole uh other points of a subject or something because uh we protect ourselves when we unfollow people that have opposite points of view and also algorithms are like tailoring content directly to us so how can we empower ourselves so we guarantee that we have like the whole the whole view of the subject thank you carolina so felipe cast do you want to answer the question of ricardo and others so regarding your absolutely right that the actually politic is not only about kind of running a business right so it's not only about the the final line or delivery it's obviously about um telling a story as well and and as you were saying obama was telling a story now trump is telling another story at that moment actually a very sad story what hitler did in in germany um and if you remember even though we didn't have social media hitler was very effective of using the media at that moment in his favor the radio um so you are very right we can we can absolutely um cheat on that game in this game the good thing about democracy and that's one of the bad things about what happened in some countries where you don't have democracy real democracy um for example what's going on in venezuela or what's going on in cuba um and in many other places is that eventually we do trust that society will realize where that story was just a fake story and in order for that story to to to kind of to break down we need to fight in the in the arena of stories we need to really tell our truth um and and and we are kind of our hands are tied because we know that we cannot we don't want to use force we want to persuade and facts are important because eventually even if you tell the nicest story in the world facts will actually affect people and that will actually make the story less or more credible depending on the facts but ideas and uh straightforward ideas are very important as well so when when trump is saying something that is good to build a wall you really need to argue against that idea with arguments and with your story and uh the problem is that establishment at that at some point and that happened in chile as well with the concertation who was a very nice well organized uh coalition of 20 years was going in in chile that eventually that that coalition stopped telling the story of the dream they had for the country and if you trust if you transform politics in something that doesn't have a dream that you don't have really a kind of a goal why you are in power and I think some sort of that happened in with with Hillary Clinton in the last he offered kind of security he offered establishment but no dream at all and if you don't have a good reason to be in politics in our case in chile our main dream is that we want every children to have the opportunity to reach their dreams it's a very simple goal and then you have a lot of policies in order to reach to that dream but if you're here just to keep everything as a start of school then you won't get that far thank you Felipe and then Bernice sure thank you there's been a number of comments since our last book so I'm going to try to address most of them very briefly unhappy to then continue a conversation afterwards on the role of academia the the question that came in the in the back I think I think academia has a huge role to play I think for starters academia has to lead the way on how we get better and smarter and quicker about listening to one another I think there's the application of a lot of very new and innovative survey methodologies like a random domain intercept technologies for example that would better allow us to do far more active listening that would then inform policy recommendations I think that there could definitely be use in that I think academia can also lead the way on practical experimentation and on evaluation of approaches to democratic governance to fact checking and to the way in which innovative approaches to storytelling will lead or not to changes in perception and behavior and so I think that those are some of the ones on on the question about Latin America and whether we're overestimating many of us in the room who are from Latin America who've lived in Latin America who are familiar with Latin American politics I'm sure are struck by the amount that we've spoken about Trump because there's a meeting about Latin America and having populist leaders that hate on media and and and fight against vulnerable rights is something that we've seen throughout our entire lives in most of our countries and so and so while the phenomenon in the United States is quite interesting what we're seeing in Latin America is is not new I think so perhaps we're overestimating the newness of it because of how a parent becomes in social media but to the minister's point I don't think we're overestimating the impact that it has I'm glad that you brought up what is happening with with women's rights because on the vulnerable populations that creation of these cones in social media make it easier to attack and to defame those who are fighting to protect vulnerable rights the commitment that I mentioned earlier from a media network also goes to organizations working to protect vulnerable rights like the anti-defamation leak who's gonna start doing some experimentation on how to protect vulnerable rights in the digital space and so definitely more more to speak about that and then one last point on algorithms because I'm really glad that you gave me an opportunity to talk about algorithms there's a responsibility for social media companies like Facebook or for search engines like Google to understand the impact that they're having on the public debate and the public discourse and the fact that the algorithms that they have and the way that those algorithms micro target users providing content that those users are likely to already agree with is detrimental to that debate that is required as part of democracy I think those organizations are taking steps to to move towards a direction that is hopefully more conducive to building trust and consensus but nonetheless that conversation doesn't end there because it's far like Berniso saying it's a cultural issue that because beyond technology and so I think to your point we need we need we have an individual responsibility to go beyond the bubbles in which we are I think I think those of us who are in this room and those of us who have the opportunity to be leaders in our sector have not not just that necessity but also that responsibility to be the ones who are checking on the context of sources who are going about sharing within our networks information that is that is truthful that are calling out information when it is not truthful that are thinking about how we bring stories that will bridge cultural divides that if we're talking about immigrants or refugees or post conflict in my country Colombia that we were able to do so in a way in which we use human centered stories so that people better understand the implications of policies so I think yes companies have a responsibility to look very closely at algorithms there's algorithmic accountability it's an increasing issue but those of us sitting in this room and beyond have an individual responsibility to also ensure that those algorithms don't don't put us into cones from which we can't come out of thank you Felipe Bernice okay just picking out on a couple more couple of comments so first Felipe was talking about algorithms and how that relates to breaking your echo chamber so it's really great that you raised this question and the fact that you already have the awareness to say how can we get the fuller picture is the kind of thinking that we want to encourage more right and the role of academia can actually play a role in shaping our young students in like embracing this kind of discerning critical thinking mindset right um the the algorithmic accountability is actually a topic I think it's going to be one of the very important ones shaping the strengths of our information culture and and and the and democracy in that regard so then what does this mean for corporate regulations perhaps in the future if we if we imagine a black mirror episode I don't know how many people here watch the tv show black mirror terrifying right so then what kind of possible future laws can we imagine that keeps companies that have such power because technology technology companies are going to be the most powerful sector at least one of the most powerful if not the most powerful sector in the next 10 years I'm not even going to say 20 years 10 years so so that's a couple of the points I wanted to touch on and finally the gentleman in the front who talked about um electing or supporting a president not just as a person to deliver on policy x but that this is the person that I identify as someone who will shape the country I want right so a lot of people have said that in the US it was not really a contest of um it was not an issue of economic anxiety this is a perspective that I'm sharing but that it was an issue of demographic anxiety the society the composition of uh American society was changing at a pace that was more fast than than comfortable for the people who were facing it and so if you are white and middle class and you find that the privileges you used to enjoy are becoming less so this is a slightly sensitive topic right we're talking about how times have changed from segregation in America and I'm using the American example because it's the most pronounced one where privileged disparity was the greatest and and now we're talking about making it more equal but to the person who is experiencing this it is it is a drop in their privilege so of course they would feel certain emotions and when they see someone who is saying that I will look after you but not only will I look after you I will I will take the privileges that was given to the other people that were not deserving and give it back to you right so this is the kind of this is the kind of fuel that feeds the demographic anxiety that we're seeing where they could not find another answer where they could not find another candidate that will respond to this anxiety in a more in a less populist way yeah thank you well this is time to finish so we are leaving the room with great concepts by our panelists for example the responsibility that Felipe was saying about you know of all leaders opinion leaders politician businessman academia of fighting lies and hate speech directly and embrace people fighting that to fund the media outlets that are fact-checking massively and to quick react as politicians to fake news to you know put your to be there for people and to to be open to say what is not true and to promote debate and discussion and I'm going from thinking one to two in the sense of you know trying people to really reflect and not take the first impression that is normally emotional and related to anger that can have as an outcome populism so thank you very much to the panelists and thank you all for coming thanks thank you