Information Finds Us First

Three decades ago, information literacy largely meant finding credible information and knowing how to evaluate it. Today, information, in a very real sense, finds us first. We increasingly consume information that has already been selected, prioritized or summarized by algorithms before we ever see it.

Think about it. Before the rise of Google, many people turned first to the public library, their local newspaper, or the Encyclopedia Britannica when they needed reliable information.  Each required a deliberate effort to access. Now? Just open your smartphone and you are bombarded with posts, tweets and feeds providing more information than you could possibly process. But how much can you trust it? And how important a skill is information literacy in a world where processing information can often be like drinking from a firehose?

Annemaree Lloyd’s 2005 article, “Information literacy: Different contexts, different concepts, different truths” published in the Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, looked at the role of information literacy among rookie and experienced firefighters, both in learning about their jobs and in developing their professional identity. It examined how firefighters understood the role of information in performing their jobs well, where they obtained their information, and which sources contributed to their professional development. Lloyd (2005) found that novice firefighters developed information literacy through three interconnected forms of learning: textual sources such as policies and manuals, social learning from instructors and experienced colleagues, and embodied learning gained from performing the work itself. Together, these sources formed the foundation of both professional competence and professional identity.

I selected Lloyd’s article because its discussion of trust within professional information environments provides a useful contrast with the far more fragmented digital environment most people navigate today. What struck me was that the firefighters’ approach worked because they trusted the information ecosystem around them. Training manuals, instructors, and hands-on experience reinforced one another rather than competed for attention. This example comes from a much less complex information environment, but to me, that question is arguably much more important today than when the article was written.

In the past, information literacy was an academic or professional competency. But today, it has evolved into a fundamental life skill. Search engines, recommendation algorithms, social media platforms and generative artificial intelligence now influence what information we encounter long before we have an opportunity to evaluate its credibility. As a result, information literacy is no longer just about finding reliable information; it is about recognizing how digital systems shape what we see, what we believe, and ultimately the decisions we make.

The Lloyd article may be over two decades old now, but its central insight remains surprisingly relevant. The learning process that it describes is still how many professions – including medicine, law and the skilled trades – prepare new practitioners.  Information literacy in these settings is about more than simply accessing information. It is about learning to recognize trustworthy sources within a community that shares common standards and expectations.

The challenge is that most of us no longer gather information primarily within those kinds of trusted professional communities. We learn about politics from social media, health from search engines, finances from YouTube, and increasingly, almost everything from AI-generated tools. What does information literacy look like when much of the information we encounter has already been filtered, ranked, summarized or even generated by algorithms?

In 2016, the Association of College and Research Libraries replaced its Information Literacy Competency Standards with the Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education, reflecting a broader understanding of what it means to be information literate. Rather than viewing information literacy as simply the ability to locate credible sources, the Framework (2016) emphasizes that authority is contextual, searching is a strategic process, and scholarship is an ongoing conversation. Those ideas have become even more relevant in an era in which search engines, recommendation algorithms and generative AI increasingly influence what people encounter before they ever evaluate its credibility.

Recent scholarship suggests that information literacy itself is evolving alongside artificial intelligence. Researchers have argued that the ACRL Framework provides a strong foundation for AI Literacy because the same habits of questioning authority, understanding context, and evaluating evidence apply whether information comes from a journal article, a search engine or a generative AI system. (Ko & Chiu, 2024)

As a result, the old model of “conduct a search and find an answer” now takes too much for granted. Today, effective information literacy is more likely to involve conducting a search, refining it, comparing multiple perspectives, questioning the credibility of sources and recognizing the role algorithms play in shaping the results. Unfortunately, many users stop after the first Google result or an AI-generated overview. At the same time, knowledge itself continues to evolve as new evidence challenges long-held assumptions, making critical evaluation an ongoing process rather than a one-time task.

This broader shift has led some researchers to argue that algorithm literacy should be considered part of media and information literacy. Because recommendation systems increasingly shape what people see and the order in which they see it, understanding how algorithms influence attention and information exposure has become an important component of being information literate. (Frau-Meigs 2024)

This evolution reminds me of a personal experience. When I was in high school, my senior term paper was on the satire of Lewis Carroll. Finding credible sources was no easy task. My local library had only a handful of books that were even remotely relevant, and I considered myself fortunate to find enough material to complete the assignment. Today, a simple Google search returns thousands of results in seconds, while an AI chatbot can produce a polished summary almost instantly. The challenge has shifted dramatically. It is no longer finding enough information – it is deciding which information deserves our trust.

This transformation is frankly remarkable. Access to knowledge has been democratized in ways that would have been considered science fiction 30 years ago. Students can consult digitized archives, scholarly databases, university websites, and AI-powered research tools from around the world. That abundance creates a different challenge. The ease of finding information has outpaced many people’s ability to evaluate it critically.

Yet many would argue that the democratization of information has given people access to more voices, more perspectives, and more knowledge than ever before. In the 1970s, the Walter Cronkite-anchored CBS Evening News was the highest-rated network newscast in the United States. Millions of Americans received much of their national news from the same broadcast each evening, and Cronkite became known as “the most trusted man in America.” While that level of public trust had its advantages, it also meant that relatively few individuals and organizations had enormous influence over which stories were covered, how they were framed, and ultimately how the public understood current events.

Today, no single news organization commands anything close to that level of influence. Consumers can choose from thousands of news outlets, independent journalists, podcasts, newsletters, YouTube channels, and AI-powered information tools. From this perspective, the modern information environment represents not a loss, but a democratization of knowledge.

International organizations have likewise emphasized the opportunities created by digital technologies and generative AI. UNESCO argues that AI has the potential to expand access to information, lifelong learning, creativity and public participation, provided users develop the information literacy needed to use such tools responsibly. Yet UNESCO also argues that these same technologies raise new questions about source reliability, synthetic media, bias, privacy, and human agency. In other words, opportunities and risks have grown together. (UNESCO, 2024)

This has undoubtedly revolutionized much of the world for the better. Never before have so many people had immediate access to scholarly research, government data, historical documents and expert perspectives from around the globe. This is no small transformation. At the same time, the removal of traditional gatekeepers has not eliminated the need for authority, credibility or critical evaluation. Instead, it has shifted much of the responsibility from traditional gatekeepers to individual users. Where editors, librarians and broadcasters once filtered much of the information reaching the public, individuals are now expected to make judgements for themselves. That shift hasn’t diminished the importance for information literacy – it has elevated it.

The firefighters in Lloyd’s study learned to identify trustworthy information within a professional community built on shared standards, experience and accountability. Most of us no longer have the luxury of operating within such clearly defined information environments. We navigate a world where information is abundant, sources compete for attention, and credibility is rarely self-evident. The question is no longer whether we can find information. It’s whether we have the information literacy to understand how the information got to us, whether the information is credible, and how we can use it responsibly. Once treated primarily as an academic or professional competency, information literacy has become an essential skill for everyday life.

Association of College and Research Libraries. (2016). Framework for information literacy for higher education. American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework

Frau-Meigs, D. (2024). Algorithm literacy as a subset of media and information literacy: Competences and design considerations. Digital, 4(2), 512–528. https://doi.org/10.3390/digital4020026

Ko, C. R., & Chiu, M.-H. (2024). How can academic librarians support generative AI literacy: An analysis of library guides using the ACRL Information Literacy Framework. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 977–979. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.1159

Lloyd, A. (2005). Information literacy: Different contexts, different concepts, different truths? Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 37(2), 82–88.

UNESCO. (2024). Examining media and information literacy responses to generative AI: UNESCO policy brief. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/examining-media-and-information-literacy-responses-generative-ai-unesco-policy-brief