Weaponized Lies: Critical Thinking In The Post-Truth
Social media has undeniably become a prominent part of everyday life in recent years for most individuals, it has been widely beneficial, but gradually the detrimental effects of social media are also becoming apparent. It has enabled people to keep in touch with friends and family all over the world with the touch of a finger, as well as being able to keep individuals constantly aware and alerted of ongoing events and breaking news. Not only are people constantly being informed with news, but they also have the ability to spread vast amounts of information to large or small communities alike. This factor has broken the construct of only news organizations and journalists being able to post news stories. The upside to this is that people now
…show more content…
have a voice and the ability to report from their own perspectives and experiences, but the downside is that this ability has lead to major skews of stories being spread and even just plain made-up stories.
This concept is now growing in popularity as “fake news”, and it seems anyone has the capability of saying black is white, right is left, and reality is seemingly up for grabs. Who was the first black president? The question may seem obvious, but when typed into google it is informed that the first black president was a man named John Hanson in 1781 (Gray, 2017). Apparently the US has had seven black presidents, including Thomas Jefferson. This is the new world filled with a maze of claims and counterclaims, and where false information as well as the truth are spread at an inconceivable speed (Gray, 2017). This has a grave effect on humans all over the world, who are receiving the information whether real or fake, because it sparks emotions in people ranging from deep anger to hope.
According to Daniel Levitin, who wrote a book recently called Weaponized Lies: Critical Thinking In The Post-Truth Era, we used to live in an age of “information overload” and now we are dealing with “misinformation overload,” (Olson, 2017).
Viral fake news gets credibility now with millions of likes and shares, and it is almost impossible to distinguish the false from the truth because they all appear the same. There must be a recurring thought whilst reading this information about fake news and how prominent it is relating to the question why do people create, spread and believe fake news? The reason fake news is now becoming so familiarized is because in the past 2016 election it was a great phenomenon, and it is also where people began to profit the most financially by creating fake news. A prolific Facebook-focused fake news writer, Paul Horner, was asked how much money he made by making stuff up and putting it on the internet? “I make like 10,000 a month from AdSense,” was Horner’s reply (Ohlheiser, 2016). There is also a growing group of Macedonian teenagers who are now using fake-news sites as an easy way to make money off gullible Americans. The money is being generated from ads, provided by self-service ad technology from companies such as Google and Facebook (Ohlheiser, 2016). The process includes packaging articles under catchy new headlines, then paying Facebook to share it, and as likes and shares tumble in so does the revenue from advertising on the site. The stories were designed to be believed and spread. It is clear the teenagers don’t care the effect their fake news has on American voting, they only cared about receiving an income that bought expensive clothes and drinks. “Pope Francis Shocks World, Endorses Donald Trump for President, Releases Statement” is an example of a completely false story and even that article was shared more than 100,000 times on Facebook (Ohlheiser,
2016).
Specifically, fake news creators saw made-up news stories about Donald Trump during the elections as a gold mine (Higgins et. al, 2016). They saw how insane people went for stories on Trump and continued to make similar stories in order to keep raking in the money. Although making money was a major motivational factor as to why people created fake news during the elections, there is also proof of Russia for example using fake news to sway the results of the election (Heflick, 2017). The creation of fake news is driven by different factors for different individuals, but the one thing all these false stories have in common is that people are believing and spreading them.
There are various contributing factors as to why people spread fake news, and they mostly lead to most people being misinformed or deceived. These fake news stories were recently found in a study to be spread when the believability was high, and then whether how much they were spread depended on the level of importance to the reader (Zubiaga et. al, 2016). People spreading news on social media have a tendency to not spend too much time thinking about it, usually a big headline draws their attention, and if it seems semi believable their subconscious will go with it. This is because people generally believe what they want to believe, and these stories are created directly to target these kind of individuals. The more these people like what they see, the more sharing and spreading of fake news occurs, and then from there the more popularity a story receives the more perceived credibility it receives. The misinformation being projected on social media to interested readers is a vicious and dangerous cycle and is why the false news spreads so far and wide without question of validity.
The term naive realism was coined by social psychologist Lee Ross and his colleagues in the 1990s and is one of the reasons fake news is so often spread in social media. Naive realism is the tendency for people to see world as an objective reality, and that one’s perceptions are realistic and the only accurate view. They also believe that others will generally share their reactions, opinions, and behaviors given the same information (Ross et. al, 1990). People who disagree with said reality are seen as uninformed, biased, or irrational. A fitting example of naive realism and why it leads to the spreading of fake news is given by Nathan Heflick, who has a Ph.D in psychology. Heflick says that if he read somewhere that Donald Trump laughed at a homeless person, his near impulse would be to believe it because of his worldview of Donald Trump as a bad person. Alternatively, if he read that Obama did that same act, he would impulsively fact check to see if it was trust because he genuinely thinks Obama is a good person (Heflick, 2017). This shows just how easy it is for people to get caught up in what they impulsively think is right and to not even bother questioning if the news is legitimate or false because it coincides with their beliefs. Naive realism is evidently playing a role in the rapid spreading of fake news without validation, so long as the argument coincides with one’s perspective.
Now, how is it our brains are so readily willing to believe fake news? Cognitive dissonance is an important concept playing a role here, and it is the uncomfortable tension in an individual that results from having two conflicting thoughts at the same time and and leads to the alteration of one’s attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors to reduce the discomfort (McLeod, 2008). A study was done observing what happened when someone’s political beliefs were challenged, and the same parts of the brain were activated that are also involved in personal identity and emotional response to threat (York, 2017). So, when people are presented with evidence that counters their position, they do not try to consider it because it would mean altering their deepest beliefs. Instead they readily believe the stories and fake news that go along with their beliefs because it is much easier than challenging their entire identity. People also experience belief perseverance that leads to them believing fake news. Belief perseverance is the persistence of one’s initial conceptions, especially when one’s beliefs are discredited but there is still an explanation of why the belief might be true (Myers, 2017). Previously mentioned neuroscientist, Levitin, says, “When an idea takes hold, it’s hard to dislodge. When new evidence comes in, we still cling to the old belief,” (Olson, 2017). People cling onto their beliefs despite being given explicit evidence that proves contradictory to their beliefs. This partners well with the last concept that plays a role in people’s belief in fake news, confirmation bias. This is the tendency to search for information that confirms one’s preconceptions (Myers, 2017). The brain filters out what it hears and pays selective attention to what confirms one’s already existing beliefs. As we can see, a lot of reasons people believe fake news is due to instinctive behaviors and processes in the brain. Fortunately, psychologists are beginning to understand why people accept fake news that support our own beliefs, while neglecting facts that challenge our beliefs.
There are many ways in which individuals can train themselves to not be fooled by fake news. Specifically, psychologist Tom Stafford suggests that all people could benefit from being more curious. Not because curious people typically receive more information, but because people who are more curious appear to appraise scientific evidence in a more balanced way so that their personal ideologies are not blinding them (Stafford, 2017). Another thing people commonly suffer from is overconfidence, the belief they know more than the average person. Consequently, this makes people less critical of the information that reinforces their assumptions, while dismissing contradictory information. People need to think more humbly and accept their own ignorance in order to avoid being convinced into a false sense of expertise (Kenyon,2016). Although there is a long way to go and many more solutions, curiosity and acceptance of ignorance are just two ways to begin reducing the blinding bias’ that have propelled Americans to fall as victims and fools to fake news.
have a voice and the ability to report from their own perspectives and experiences, but the downside is that this ability has lead to major skews of stories being spread and even just plain made-up stories.
This concept is now growing in popularity as “fake news”, and it seems anyone has the capability of saying black is white, right is left, and reality is seemingly up for grabs. Who was the first black president? The question may seem obvious, but when typed into google it is informed that the first black president was a man named John Hanson in 1781 (Gray, 2017). Apparently the US has had seven black presidents, including Thomas Jefferson. This is the new world filled with a maze of claims and counterclaims, and where false information as well as the truth are spread at an inconceivable speed (Gray, 2017). This has a grave effect on humans all over the world, who are receiving the information whether real or fake, because it sparks emotions in people ranging from deep anger to hope.
According to Daniel Levitin, who wrote a book recently called Weaponized Lies: Critical Thinking In The Post-Truth Era, we used to live in an age of “information overload” and now we are dealing with “misinformation overload,” (Olson, 2017).
Viral fake news gets credibility now with millions of likes and shares, and it is almost impossible to distinguish the false from the truth because they all appear the same. There must be a recurring thought whilst reading this information about fake news and how prominent it is relating to the question why do people create, spread and believe fake news? The reason fake news is now becoming so familiarized is because in the past 2016 election it was a great phenomenon, and it is also where people began to profit the most financially by creating fake news. A prolific Facebook-focused fake news writer, Paul Horner, was asked how much money he made by making stuff up and putting it on the internet? “I make like 10,000 a month from AdSense,” was Horner’s reply (Ohlheiser, 2016). There is also a growing group of Macedonian teenagers who are now using fake-news sites as an easy way to make money off gullible Americans. The money is being generated from ads, provided by self-service ad technology from companies such as Google and Facebook (Ohlheiser, 2016). The process includes packaging articles under catchy new headlines, then paying Facebook to share it, and as likes and shares tumble in so does the revenue from advertising on the site. The stories were designed to be believed and spread. It is clear the teenagers don’t care the effect their fake news has on American voting, they only cared about receiving an income that bought expensive clothes and drinks. “Pope Francis Shocks World, Endorses Donald Trump for President, Releases Statement” is an example of a completely false story and even that article was shared more than 100,000 times on Facebook (Ohlheiser,
2016).
Specifically, fake news creators saw made-up news stories about Donald Trump during the elections as a gold mine (Higgins et. al, 2016). They saw how insane people went for stories on Trump and continued to make similar stories in order to keep raking in the money. Although making money was a major motivational factor as to why people created fake news during the elections, there is also proof of Russia for example using fake news to sway the results of the election (Heflick, 2017). The creation of fake news is driven by different factors for different individuals, but the one thing all these false stories have in common is that people are believing and spreading them.
There are various contributing factors as to why people spread fake news, and they mostly lead to most people being misinformed or deceived. These fake news stories were recently found in a study to be spread when the believability was high, and then whether how much they were spread depended on the level of importance to the reader (Zubiaga et. al, 2016). People spreading news on social media have a tendency to not spend too much time thinking about it, usually a big headline draws their attention, and if it seems semi believable their subconscious will go with it. This is because people generally believe what they want to believe, and these stories are created directly to target these kind of individuals. The more these people like what they see, the more sharing and spreading of fake news occurs, and then from there the more popularity a story receives the more perceived credibility it receives. The misinformation being projected on social media to interested readers is a vicious and dangerous cycle and is why the false news spreads so far and wide without question of validity.
The term naive realism was coined by social psychologist Lee Ross and his colleagues in the 1990s and is one of the reasons fake news is so often spread in social media. Naive realism is the tendency for people to see world as an objective reality, and that one’s perceptions are realistic and the only accurate view. They also believe that others will generally share their reactions, opinions, and behaviors given the same information (Ross et. al, 1990). People who disagree with said reality are seen as uninformed, biased, or irrational. A fitting example of naive realism and why it leads to the spreading of fake news is given by Nathan Heflick, who has a Ph.D in psychology. Heflick says that if he read somewhere that Donald Trump laughed at a homeless person, his near impulse would be to believe it because of his worldview of Donald Trump as a bad person. Alternatively, if he read that Obama did that same act, he would impulsively fact check to see if it was trust because he genuinely thinks Obama is a good person (Heflick, 2017). This shows just how easy it is for people to get caught up in what they impulsively think is right and to not even bother questioning if the news is legitimate or false because it coincides with their beliefs. Naive realism is evidently playing a role in the rapid spreading of fake news without validation, so long as the argument coincides with one’s perspective.
Now, how is it our brains are so readily willing to believe fake news? Cognitive dissonance is an important concept playing a role here, and it is the uncomfortable tension in an individual that results from having two conflicting thoughts at the same time and and leads to the alteration of one’s attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors to reduce the discomfort (McLeod, 2008). A study was done observing what happened when someone’s political beliefs were challenged, and the same parts of the brain were activated that are also involved in personal identity and emotional response to threat (York, 2017). So, when people are presented with evidence that counters their position, they do not try to consider it because it would mean altering their deepest beliefs. Instead they readily believe the stories and fake news that go along with their beliefs because it is much easier than challenging their entire identity. People also experience belief perseverance that leads to them believing fake news. Belief perseverance is the persistence of one’s initial conceptions, especially when one’s beliefs are discredited but there is still an explanation of why the belief might be true (Myers, 2017). Previously mentioned neuroscientist, Levitin, says, “When an idea takes hold, it’s hard to dislodge. When new evidence comes in, we still cling to the old belief,” (Olson, 2017). People cling onto their beliefs despite being given explicit evidence that proves contradictory to their beliefs. This partners well with the last concept that plays a role in people’s belief in fake news, confirmation bias. This is the tendency to search for information that confirms one’s preconceptions (Myers, 2017). The brain filters out what it hears and pays selective attention to what confirms one’s already existing beliefs. As we can see, a lot of reasons people believe fake news is due to instinctive behaviors and processes in the brain. Fortunately, psychologists are beginning to understand why people accept fake news that support our own beliefs, while neglecting facts that challenge our beliefs.
There are many ways in which individuals can train themselves to not be fooled by fake news. Specifically, psychologist Tom Stafford suggests that all people could benefit from being more curious. Not because curious people typically receive more information, but because people who are more curious appear to appraise scientific evidence in a more balanced way so that their personal ideologies are not blinding them (Stafford, 2017). Another thing people commonly suffer from is overconfidence, the belief they know more than the average person. Consequently, this makes people less critical of the information that reinforces their assumptions, while dismissing contradictory information. People need to think more humbly and accept their own ignorance in order to avoid being convinced into a false sense of expertise (Kenyon,2016). Although there is a long way to go and many more solutions, curiosity and acceptance of ignorance are just two ways to begin reducing the blinding bias’ that have propelled Americans to fall as victims and fools to fake news.