In a pub in a village in England, there are more than 1000 tallies on the ceiling beams. They count the number of times Tony, a local patron, has cited a fact he gleaned from the Daily Mail which later turned out to be untrue. The first tally was drawn in the late eighties. The latest, last week.
In the debate that rages over fake news, the bulk of the suppliers, carriers and users are almost completely overlooked. It is as though policy makers believe that fake news occurs in a vacuum, produced by a nefarious meme factory in Ukraine which somehow, mysteriously and as if by magic, undermines our democratic functions. Forgetting that it is individuals like Tony who believe disinformation, then propagate it, lending it credibility simply by repetition.
Much like the gun debate that rages in the United States, the focus is on the guns, not the culture that creates the people who shoot children in schools. The problem with gun violence will not be solved simply by restricting the sale of goods – regulations in the US aren’t substantively more lax than many other countries. The reason for gun violence is the culture that created it. Which is not to say that the sale of guns should not be restricted – just like the manufacture of fake news should be restricted, but that is only half the problem. The gun is simply the tool, much like fake news is simply the tool. It is the culture that is the problem.
So back to the pub in a village in England. The virtue of a village is that it is populated by a lot of different types of people. The only thing many of the inhabitants of most villages have in common is geography. Which prevents an echo chamber forming because there will be, necessarily, a diversity of opinion. So, when Tony repeats a lie, there are enough people in the pub who think differently, to call him out.
Social media is a wonderful tool to enable individuals to find like-minded people who would otherwise have been the only gay, the only PoC, or the only eccentric in the village. For marginalised communities, it has literally saved lives. It has created identity politics, which is, by and large, a positive step for minority groups because their experience of the world is validated by their community, their numbers give their voices volume and impact.
However, the flip side of that is that it is not only human rights, progressive values and diversity that have been championed by amplified voices. Less progressive, illiberal and intolerant individuals have also been able to find each other, and air their views in environments where there is no diversity of opinion. However, it is not the airing of these views that is the problem per se. We cannot empower individuals to use the media to share their experience of the world and to tell the stories and then ignore them because we don’t some people’s world view, and we don’t like their stories. Ignoring these people has clearly not worked.
So much of populism and nationalism is simply taking advantage of disenfranchised and frightened people who are screaming to be heard and angry at having been ignored for so long. While any toxic political debate that is overtaking public discourse, there is an instinct to unfriend or unfollow anyone who’s opinions differ. And while it is understandable, it is not healthy.
The opposing side is othered, vilified and ostracised. No meaningful discussion can take place, and therefore no peace can be brokered. Disinformation is fundamental to the toxicity of the debate, because it’s very difficult to remain rational and calm when someone who clings to the belief that black is white despite all evidence to the contrary.
So, they are left isolated in an echo chamber without a diverse community to challenge the disinformation they believe and spread. But we are capable of forming communities based on more than our political beliefs and one narrow part of our identities, after all, we have managed it for thousands of years without ideological battles raging as intensely as they do now.
While I am a progressive liberal democrat, I am also a parent, I am also a dog owner, I am also terrible at online shopping, I also live in a village. My identity is multifaceted enough that surely I can find common ground beyond my political and social values with people who don’t share them. It is from that common ground that a discussion can begin.
Very few people want to believe a lie, especially not one that will harm them, but we can all find ourselves boxed in by our own psychology. It is by very gentle coaxing, calm persistence, or very immediate reality that anyone will come to the truth. Leaving someone in their echo chamber and vilifying them is not the way to bring them to the truth. Calling out lies and challenging disinformation in our communities, however those communities are formed, and by whatever common identity we share, is key to combatting disinformation.
Disinformation does not happen in the ether. We are unwitting soldiers, pitted against each other in what will doubtless be called the War of Information by later generations, and our weapons are facts and lies. We have been left unprepared and unarmed for these battles by policy makers. Social division is the primary aim of the people who create fake news, to create political chaos which can be exploited by external powers. We have become the architects of our own destruction, whether we are the ones who believe fake news or not, if we allow this divided culture to go on any longer.
Tony has not been barred from the pub. He has been a regular for thirty years, he has not been shunned or vilified in the process of calling out the lies he believes, left to drink alone and stew in his own poison. Admittedly, he’s persisting, judging by the growing number of tallies on the beams, but the people around him who might have followed him are less likely to. He is at is so much less likely to fall into the traps of extremism and hate because he is at least heard. He is a member of a broader community founded on something more than a lie.
Related Posts
In a pub in a village in England, there are more than 1000 tallies on the ceiling beams. They count the number of times Tony, a local patron, has cited a fact he gleaned from the Daily Mail which later turned out to be untrue. The first tally was drawn in the late eighties. The latest, last week.
In the debate that rages over fake news, the bulk of the suppliers, carriers and users are almost completely overlooked. It is as though policy makers believe that fake news occurs in a vacuum, produced by a nefarious meme factory in Ukraine which somehow, mysteriously and as if by magic, undermines our democratic functions. Forgetting that it is individuals like Tony who believe disinformation, then propagate it, lending it credibility simply by repetition.
Much like the gun debate that rages in the United States, the focus is on the guns, not the culture that creates the people who shoot children in schools. The problem with gun violence will not be solved simply by restricting the sale of goods – regulations in the US aren’t substantively more lax than many other countries. The reason for gun violence is the culture that created it. Which is not to say that the sale of guns should not be restricted – just like the manufacture of fake news should be restricted, but that is only half the problem. The gun is simply the tool, much like fake news is simply the tool. It is the culture that is the problem.
So back to the pub in a village in England. The virtue of a village is that it is populated by a lot of different types of people. The only thing many of the inhabitants of most villages have in common is geography. Which prevents an echo chamber forming because there will be, necessarily, a diversity of opinion. So, when Tony repeats a lie, there are enough people in the pub who think differently, to call him out.
Social media is a wonderful tool to enable individuals to find like-minded people who would otherwise have been the only gay, the only PoC, or the only eccentric in the village. For marginalised communities, it has literally saved lives. It has created identity politics, which is, by and large, a positive step for minority groups because their experience of the world is validated by their community, their numbers give their voices volume and impact.
However, the flip side of that is that it is not only human rights, progressive values and diversity that have been championed by amplified voices. Less progressive, illiberal and intolerant individuals have also been able to find each other, and air their views in environments where there is no diversity of opinion. However, it is not the airing of these views that is the problem per se. We cannot empower individuals to use the media to share their experience of the world and to tell the stories and then ignore them because we don’t some people’s world view, and we don’t like their stories. Ignoring these people has clearly not worked.
So much of populism and nationalism is simply taking advantage of disenfranchised and frightened people who are screaming to be heard and angry at having been ignored for so long. While any toxic political debate that is overtaking public discourse, there is an instinct to unfriend or unfollow anyone who’s opinions differ. And while it is understandable, it is not healthy.
The opposing side is othered, vilified and ostracised. No meaningful discussion can take place, and therefore no peace can be brokered. Disinformation is fundamental to the toxicity of the debate, because it’s very difficult to remain rational and calm when someone who clings to the belief that black is white despite all evidence to the contrary.
So, they are left isolated in an echo chamber without a diverse community to challenge the disinformation they believe and spread. But we are capable of forming communities based on more than our political beliefs and one narrow part of our identities, after all, we have managed it for thousands of years without ideological battles raging as intensely as they do now.
While I am a progressive liberal democrat, I am also a parent, I am also a dog owner, I am also terrible at online shopping, I also live in a village. My identity is multifaceted enough that surely I can find common ground beyond my political and social values with people who don’t share them. It is from that common ground that a discussion can begin.
Very few people want to believe a lie, especially not one that will harm them, but we can all find ourselves boxed in by our own psychology. It is by very gentle coaxing, calm persistence, or very immediate reality that anyone will come to the truth. Leaving someone in their echo chamber and vilifying them is not the way to bring them to the truth. Calling out lies and challenging disinformation in our communities, however those communities are formed, and by whatever common identity we share, is key to combatting disinformation.
Disinformation does not happen in the ether. We are unwitting soldiers, pitted against each other in what will doubtless be called the War of Information by later generations, and our weapons are facts and lies. We have been left unprepared and unarmed for these battles by policy makers. Social division is the primary aim of the people who create fake news, to create political chaos which can be exploited by external powers. We have become the architects of our own destruction, whether we are the ones who believe fake news or not, if we allow this divided culture to go on any longer.
Tony has not been barred from the pub. He has been a regular for thirty years, he has not been shunned or vilified in the process of calling out the lies he believes, left to drink alone and stew in his own poison. Admittedly, he’s persisting, judging by the growing number of tallies on the beams, but the people around him who might have followed him are less likely to. He is at is so much less likely to fall into the traps of extremism and hate because he is at least heard. He is a member of a broader community founded on something more than a lie.
Related Posts
In a pub in a village in England, there are more than 1000 tallies on the ceiling beams. They count the number of times Tony, a local patron, has cited a fact he gleaned from the Daily Mail which later turned out to be untrue. The first tally was drawn in the late eighties. The latest, last week.
In the debate that rages over fake news, the bulk of the suppliers, carriers and users are almost completely overlooked. It is as though policy makers believe that fake news occurs in a vacuum, produced by a nefarious meme factory in Ukraine which somehow, mysteriously and as if by magic, undermines our democratic functions. Forgetting that it is individuals like Tony who believe disinformation, then propagate it, lending it credibility simply by repetition.
Much like the gun debate that rages in the United States, the focus is on the guns, not the culture that creates the people who shoot children in schools. The problem with gun violence will not be solved simply by restricting the sale of goods – regulations in the US aren’t substantively more lax than many other countries. The reason for gun violence is the culture that created it. Which is not to say that the sale of guns should not be restricted – just like the manufacture of fake news should be restricted, but that is only half the problem. The gun is simply the tool, much like fake news is simply the tool. It is the culture that is the problem.
So back to the pub in a village in England. The virtue of a village is that it is populated by a lot of different types of people. The only thing many of the inhabitants of most villages have in common is geography. Which prevents an echo chamber forming because there will be, necessarily, a diversity of opinion. So, when Tony repeats a lie, there are enough people in the pub who think differently, to call him out.
Social media is a wonderful tool to enable individuals to find like-minded people who would otherwise have been the only gay, the only PoC, or the only eccentric in the village. For marginalised communities, it has literally saved lives. It has created identity politics, which is, by and large, a positive step for minority groups because their experience of the world is validated by their community, their numbers give their voices volume and impact.
However, the flip side of that is that it is not only human rights, progressive values and diversity that have been championed by amplified voices. Less progressive, illiberal and intolerant individuals have also been able to find each other, and air their views in environments where there is no diversity of opinion. However, it is not the airing of these views that is the problem per se. We cannot empower individuals to use the media to share their experience of the world and to tell the stories and then ignore them because we don’t some people’s world view, and we don’t like their stories. Ignoring these people has clearly not worked.
So much of populism and nationalism is simply taking advantage of disenfranchised and frightened people who are screaming to be heard and angry at having been ignored for so long. While any toxic political debate that is overtaking public discourse, there is an instinct to unfriend or unfollow anyone who’s opinions differ. And while it is understandable, it is not healthy.
The opposing side is othered, vilified and ostracised. No meaningful discussion can take place, and therefore no peace can be brokered. Disinformation is fundamental to the toxicity of the debate, because it’s very difficult to remain rational and calm when someone who clings to the belief that black is white despite all evidence to the contrary.
So, they are left isolated in an echo chamber without a diverse community to challenge the disinformation they believe and spread. But we are capable of forming communities based on more than our political beliefs and one narrow part of our identities, after all, we have managed it for thousands of years without ideological battles raging as intensely as they do now.
While I am a progressive liberal democrat, I am also a parent, I am also a dog owner, I am also terrible at online shopping, I also live in a village. My identity is multifaceted enough that surely I can find common ground beyond my political and social values with people who don’t share them. It is from that common ground that a discussion can begin.
Very few people want to believe a lie, especially not one that will harm them, but we can all find ourselves boxed in by our own psychology. It is by very gentle coaxing, calm persistence, or very immediate reality that anyone will come to the truth. Leaving someone in their echo chamber and vilifying them is not the way to bring them to the truth. Calling out lies and challenging disinformation in our communities, however those communities are formed, and by whatever common identity we share, is key to combatting disinformation.
Disinformation does not happen in the ether. We are unwitting soldiers, pitted against each other in what will doubtless be called the War of Information by later generations, and our weapons are facts and lies. We have been left unprepared and unarmed for these battles by policy makers. Social division is the primary aim of the people who create fake news, to create political chaos which can be exploited by external powers. We have become the architects of our own destruction, whether we are the ones who believe fake news or not, if we allow this divided culture to go on any longer.
Tony has not been barred from the pub. He has been a regular for thirty years, he has not been shunned or vilified in the process of calling out the lies he believes, left to drink alone and stew in his own poison. Admittedly, he’s persisting, judging by the growing number of tallies on the beams, but the people around him who might have followed him are less likely to. He is at is so much less likely to fall into the traps of extremism and hate because he is at least heard. He is a member of a broader community founded on something more than a lie.
