The Problem of Disinformation

[á´…eparted]

Making this a topic since it's becoming a larger topic on the Coronavirus thread.

Disinformation has been a problem for all of human history, but with the advent of the internet and eventually rapid social media in the 2010's disinformation has exploded as an enormous phenomena that has had real tangible impacts on society and human health. The most well known illustration of this is the anti-vaccine movement. The most outlandish example is arguably the flat-earth movement. Those movements are generally apolitical (the political aspects of them are due to exploitation by various groups), but the political disinformation campaigns have come into the most prominent focus since Trump became the US president, though the problem preceeds that by a long time.

The purpose of this thread I would say should be on the problem of disinformation in general, not any one specific topic. Further, how are we to deal with this as a society? What can be done? What is being done? Is it working?

Discuss. (I'll participate later, I have to go read some more linear algebra ).

 

[Vendrah]

My take on Corona topic:

"Misinformed people" talks way too much while others dont speak much (Im asking myself if I should be more present and perhaps less conflict avoiding in this section although I dont wish to be banned because of a non-main area of the forum), and misinformed people wont listen anyway.
And, you know, as I already learned in Brazil most people cover their real why's into fake why's and sometimes it is just tiring discussing these fake why's. And a lot of these misinformed people have hidden bad intentions that are really difficult to prove, although some are obvious. For example, do you think that an economy discussion against the quarantine is an easy and straight discussion in Brazil? No, and there will be fake data, fake morals, lots of fake stuff to deal with, and lots of 'misinformed' people which some of them are spreading fake information for their own profit. And some of these are incredibly moralistic, some people cant even distinguish a real moralistic person from one of these fakes and I dont blame them, sometimes I cant do the distinction either.

The world is full of lies, sadly.

The problem are two: Convincing liars and the people who work for them for free. At least in my opinion.

1) Just because something appears to be convincing it is not necessarily the truth.
2) I disagree on political interest, there are manipulation to support politics, for example libertarians are usually great at statistical manipulation to support their views.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

I think a big part of dealing with it is accepting that people are sometimes shitty like that and leaping headfirst into a power struggle when it's happening is actually just feeding the behavior instead of effectively getting rid of it. The biggest offenders, ime, are better deflectors/pettifoggers/gaslighters than normal people can even begin to anticipate. It's alot like dealing with narcissists. Establishing 'truth' is more about the power struggle and needing to feel powerful enough to dictate what the truth is than it is about earnestly discerning the truth. So it's just important to remember that locking horns and treating them like what they're saying is important is feeding the behavior.

I mean, do correct the information, but don't get into a power struggle. Do it dispassionately, without hurling insults, leaving very objective and calm reasoning for why the disinformation is dangerous or detrimental - if presented well enough, any reasonable person will either realize it's the most logical path or they'll present a logical counter that'll make you realize they are onto something. If it's someone who truly is just attached to spreading disinformation, they won't be able to make a substantial counter. I think that's the best we can do? There will always be some people who are fooled by them, just like there will always be people who enable narcissists - accept it's as much a part of life we can't always change any more than we can change the weather.

I think the biggest thing to remember is that it's not possible to get rid of them with a power struggle any more than it is to get rid of a narcissist with a power struggle - they've been adapting their whole lives to feeding that need and they'll win. Do what you can, let go of what you can't. Just don't get hooked.

As an aside, I do feel like this forum enables too much of it. It makes the environment feel a bit toxic and it wouldn't surprise me if it's driven away more than a couple people who would have been great additions, but who aren't willing to waste time on the toxic elements.

eta: On a bigger scale, I think the media needs to stop treating absolutely everything Trump does wrong like it's important. He stokes hate, then he uses that hate to push the narrative that the 'haters' only see so much about him being absolutely unacceptable solely because of the hate; his supporters seem to see the hate (it's everywhere) and swallow that narrative whole. My own experience in trying to explain why I think Trump is absolutely unfit to be a manager at a fast food joint - let alone leader of a nation - gets met with "your hate is making you see what you want to see" chanting (complete with glazed over look in the eyes, the inability to actually hear anything, etc *cough*cult*cough*). We really need to boost the signal / reduce the noise (focus on what's essential, stop getting triggered by what's largely inconsequential). Because he uses the noise to push his narrative and deflect from the signal.

 

[á´…eparted]

On a bigger scale, I think the media needs to stop treating absolutely everything Trump does wrong like it's important.

Doing so greatly cheapens the serious and illegal things he does. This is another major factor in the disinformation problem; the assumption that ALL information is good. It makes the volume of it far too high for anyone one person to keep up with, and its rather the point. He is far too exposed constantly. Like, stop putting him on the goddamn television. Stop quoting his twitter. Stop assuming he has anything of value and use to say or be of worth analyzing. Rachel Maddow has it done right with this and I hope others start following in suit. She talks about the things he and his administration does, and not what they say unless a particular quote is key to understanding the actions.

Trump and people like him should be talked about and with orthogonally, not directly. It also allows for a much better modulated filter of what to focus on, and what to not.

 

[Lark]

On the topic of the anti-vax movement, I find it interesting that what we are witnessing is the world without a single vax, they want no vaxes at all.

The lack of one is proving to be bad enough.

 

[noname3788]

Disinformation has been a problem for all of human history, but with the advent of the internet and eventually rapid social media in the 2010's disinformation has exploded as an enormous phenomena that has had real tangible impacts on society and human health. The most well known illustration of this is the anti-vaccine movement. The most outlandish example is arguably the flat-earth movement. Those movements are generally apolitical (the political aspects of them are due to exploitation by various groups), but the political disinformation campaigns have come into the most prominent focus since Trump became the US president, though the problem preceeds that by a long time.

Humans have a strange habit of trusting those who're close to them, or who make a very confident impression. People believe those facebook posts not because they are imidiately convinced, but because it's a friend of them who posted it. And as a proof of friendship, they'll also start sharing things to other people or like it. And it always had existed, social media just accelerates the process. Regarding trump, I'll also refer to the corona thread: Trump doesn't offer logical statements, but simple solutions to complex issues. So simple that anyone can remember and share it, and anyone who believes in trump will spread the message. Same mechanism.

And I think there's nothing that can be done about it, other than removing democracy or installing censorship. We may see movements like anti-vaccine or anything Trump says as bullshit, but keep in mind that it does reflect a significant part of the US population. I'm not sure whether Trump simply benefited of exploiting ill-informed people or whether he placed them through his campaign, in the end, it's democracy working as intended. Trump got elected because people voted for Trump.

 

[Lark]

I think a big part of dealing with it is accepting that people are sometimes shitty like that and leaping headfirst into a power struggle when it's happening is actually just feeding the behavior instead of effectively getting rid of it. The biggest offenders, ime, are better deflectors/pettifoggers/gaslighters than normal people can even begin to anticipate. It's alot like dealing with narcissists. Establishing 'truth' is more about the power struggle and needing to feel powerful enough to dictate what the truth is than it is about earnestly discerning the truth. So it's just important to remember that locking horns and treating them like what they're saying is important is feeding the behavior.

I mean, do correct the information, but don't get into a power struggle. Do it dispassionately, without hurling insults, leaving very objective and calm reasoning for why the disinformation is dangerous or detrimental - if presented well enough, any reasonable person will either realize it's the most logical path or they'll present a logical counter that'll make you realize they are onto something. If it's someone who truly is just attached to spreading disinformation, they won't be able to make a substantial counter. I think that's the best we can do? There will always be some people who are fooled by them, just like there will always be people who enable narcissists - accept it's as much a part of life we can't always change any more than we can change the weather.

I think the biggest thing to remember is that it's not possible to get rid of them with a power struggle any more than it is to get rid of a narcissist with a power struggle - they've been adapting their whole lives to feeding that need and they'll win. Do what you can, let go of what you can't. Just don't get hooked.

As an aside, I do feel like this forum enables too much of it. It makes the environment feel a bit toxic and it wouldn't surprise me if it's driven away more than a couple people who would have been great additions, but who aren't willing to waste time on the toxic elements.

eta: On a bigger scale, I think the media needs to stop treating absolutely everything Trump does wrong like it's important. He stokes hate, then he uses that hate to push the narrative that the 'haters' only see so much about him being absolutely unacceptable solely because of the hate; his supporters seem to see the hate (it's everywhere) and swallow that narrative whole. My own experience in trying to explain why I think Trump is absolutely unfit to be a manager at a fast food joint - let alone leader of a nation - gets met with "your hate is making you see what you want to see" chanting (complete with glazed over look in the eyes, the inability to actually hear anything, etc *cough*cult*cough*). We really need to boost the signal / reduce the noise (focus on what's essential, stop getting triggered by what's largely inconsequential). Because he uses the noise to push his narrative and deflect from the signal.

Trump is a product of reality TV and the so called attention economy.

I'm not really sure how you respond to that, like I mean I go back and forth as to how is best to respond to it, but I do know that since its become a bigger and bigger thing the attention economy has just created a big, big space for disinformation.

Like I remember the disinformation books which were printed a long time ago, think they predated facebook and a lot of the commonplace social media there is today, and at the time I thought this is nonsense, how did this get published but now you can easily find stuff that's not that different as the staple of social media and often the core beliefs of a lot of people who are or should be in therapy.

 

[cascadeco]

I know this has been mentioned as a cultural problem in recent years in articles, analyses, etc, but the devaluing of and even sneering/scorn of established journals, of experts, of actual people with firsthand experience, is quite tied to this.

Replace that with every armchair person who conflates their Opinion and Speculation as just as valid as the words coming from actual experts and people educated in these fields, or with years of experience, and it's a real problem.

Our current culture revolves around this notion - that each and every one of is important, worth listening to, should be given attention and 'heard', and whose 'voice' should be given as much weight as the voice of someone who is educated in said subject, and, well, enter the shit show of today.

You have people who consider people who give *opinions* on talk shows to actually be giving 'truth'. No, it's an opinion.

So people who are in fact uninformed, who did not spend 8+ years of post-college grad work or fellowships, can use such fluffy phrases as 'fake news', or emotional techniques such as not answering any questions or challenges at all and citing 'bias' from the other as a legitimate reason to not answer any questions, you have people who shamelessly state they are the most rational person here, they are the most x, y, z, and so on.... all psychological deflection and mumbo jumbo. And of course these sorts of inane responses and tactics are used by Trump as well - so it's easy to see how supporters will further support someone who validates their own tendencies. [As if anyone who actually held X trait would boast of it. Boasting is a sure sign of it not being true.]

Or your run of the mill folks who are just rolling with the times... If people are inundated with tens of millions of people trying to be 'heard' and wanting their videos, or memes, or any nonsense, to go viral, and if culturally people are simultaneously instructed to tiptoe around anyone voicing an opinion because 'everyone has a right to be heard', well, that's why we're here. Until culturally we are dialed back again to 'Nope, all of you fools are not worth my time and do not deserve an equal amount of bandwidth as these experts over here', we're going to be rolling around in this crap for a while.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Doing so greatly cheapens the serious and illegal things he does.

You're misunderstanding my post. The way that the media goes nuts over every little thing he does detracts from the more serious stories. There needs to be a more vigilant focus on the serious offenses because they get lost in the maelstrom of hate directed at him; supporters see the maelstrom, then buy the narrative that the maelstrom is the story (and that all bad news about him is fake and created because of all the hate). Narcissists know how to create lots of bathwater and how to make it as murky as possible, all to ensure all babies therein get thrown out.

We need to amplify the signal (focus on the most serious offenses and the proof) and cut down the noise that tends to drown it out.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Like I remember the disinformation books which were printed a long time ago, think they predated facebook and a lot of the commonplace social media there is today, and at the time I thought this is nonsense, how did this get published but now you can easily find stuff that's not that different as the staple of social media and often the core beliefs of a lot of people who are or should be in therapy.

As an interesting aside, there's a guy on my Fb list who I haven't unfriended just because his absolutely over-the-top tendency to adhere to bizarre realities is stunning. He posts clearly fake news (those articles that are presented as real news but are traced back to satire origins), and then vents when Facebook "censures" the "real" news by removing the links. Best part: he's a psychologist.

I've wondered if maybe the internet has provided an opportunity for these people to find each other and now they can affirm each other's crackpot beliefs, whereas before the loneliness would have forced a reality check? (Maybe that's what you're saying too).

If there's a book out there about why people passionately cling to disinformation, I haven't found it. But it strongly resembles the narcissistic need for power and to be able to dictate shared reality, so that's the model I use to 'understand' it.

 

[á´…eparted]

You're misunderstanding my post. The way that the media goes nuts over every little thing he does detracts from the more serious stories. There needs to be a more vigilant focus on the serious offenses because they get lost in the maelstrom of hate directed at him; supporters see the maelstrom, then buy the narrative that the maelstrom is the story (and that all bad news about him is fake and created because of all the hate). Narcissists know how to create lots of bathwater and how to make it as murky as possible, all to ensure all babies therein get thrown out.

We need to amplify the signal (focus on the most serious offenses and the proof) and cut down the noise that tends to drown it out.

Probably should say so here instead of in a rep, but that is exactly what I was saying. Information overload makes it impossible for any one person, or group to keep up. The response of trying to address it all too makes it seem like it is all important, when it isn't. I think part of why this cheapning is occuring is in an attempt to document all evidence, but quality control got rather lost during that process.

 

[ceecee]

eta: On a bigger scale, I think the media needs to stop treating absolutely everything Trump does wrong like it's important.

This but I'd take it a step further. The media needs to stop treating absolutely everything Trump does as important.

Everything he says, everything he tweets, every rumor he shares as fact, every time his lard ass is sitting in a golf cart. Trump is interested in one thing - maintaining his celebrity. It's how he got elected - it certainly wasn't on past job performance. The media is responsible for making him a celebrity. Take away even 50% of that attention would be enormously beneficial to the American people as a whole.

In the end the American people need to learn the difference between opinion and fact and commentary and reporting. The vast majority of what is "media" is churnalism filled with churnalists. That's because they fired all the actual journalists.

 

[Jaguar]

Claiming to be an expert doesn't make you one.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Probably should say so here instead of in a rep, but that is exactly what I was saying. Information overload makes it impossible for any one person, or group to keep up. The response of trying to address it all too makes it seem like it is all important, when it isn't. I think part of why this cheapning is occuring is in an attempt to document all evidence, but quality control got rather lost during that process.

Yeah, I somehow read an implicit "But..." at the beginning of your other post that wasn't there.

This thing about information overload is interesting, and there are *so* many tangents it can lead to that it's overwhelming (in regard to why it's there/ where it started). What I find fascinating is how we usually aren't even remotely aware of that part of our consciousness that points to information and says "that's the information that's correct!" We more or less trust it's reliable and can form weird emotional attachments to it before really evaluating whether or not it's accurate. It's relatively self-evident in other people when that internal judge has become as reliable as a sock puppet on crack (when they're at least a bit delusional, and/or when they feel an irrational need for their internal judge to be Right and for others to affirm it). (Or something).

With the Fb guy I mentioned: anyone seeing his feed might come to the conclusion that he identifies with what he hates (I.e. "I am a hater of ____") far more than he identifies with what he loves because the vast majority of his posts are about what he hates. And I've wondered if he decides "truth" based on how much a headline feeds/reinforces his hate (thereby feeding his sense of righteousness).

Eta, this tweet comes to mind:

^I took a screen shot when I saw it because I thought it was hilarious.

 

[Red Herring]

I know this has been mentioned as a cultural problem in recent years in articles, analyses, etc, but the devaluing of and even sneering/scorn of established journals, of experts, of actual people with firsthand experience, is quite tied to this.

Replace that with every armchair person who conflates their Opinion and Speculation as just as valid as the words coming from actual experts and people educated in these fields, or with years of experience, and it's a real problem.

Our current culture revolves around this notion - that each and every one of is important, worth listening to, should be given attention and 'heard', and whose 'voice' should be given as much weight as the voice of someone who is educated in said subject, and, well, enter the shit show of today.

You have people who consider people who give *opinions* on talk shows to actually be giving 'truth'. No, it's an opinion.

So people who are in fact uninformed, who did not spend 8+ years of post-college grad work or fellowships, can use such fluffy phrases as 'fake news', or emotional techniques such as not answering any questions or challenges at all and citing 'bias' from the other as a legitimate reason to not answer any questions, you have people who shamelessly state they are the most rational person here, they are the most x, y, z, and so on.... all psychological deflection and mumbo jumbo. And of course these sorts of inane responses and tactics are used by Trump as well - so it's easy to see how supporters will further support someone who validates their own tendencies. [As if anyone who actually held X trait would boast of it. Boasting is a sure sign of it not being true.]

Or your run of the mill folks who are just rolling with the times... If people are inundated with tens of millions of people trying to be 'heard' and wanting their videos, or memes, or any nonsense, to go viral, and if culturally people are simultaneously instructed to tiptoe around anyone voicing an opinion because 'everyone has a right to be heard', well, that's why we're here. Until culturally we are dialed back again to 'Nope, all of you fools are not worth my time and do not deserve an equal amount of bandwidth as these experts over here', we're going to be rolling around in this crap for a while.

Very much this.

I have a theory in that regard. After WW II and the crimes against humanity that went with that era there was some serious reckoning with regard to mass psychology and authoritarianism. Education changed drastically and so the values transmitted. There was a massive increase in individualism in the Western world. There was a much greater emphasis on critical thinking, "think for yourself", "be skeptical", etc. That process became more pronounced in the last few decades and was probably accelerated a lot by the internet and its fast exchange f ideas and information and the possibility to seek out whatever people, ideas, and "facts" you like. Now, there is a lot to be said for that approach but a) it requires excellent education (both intellectual and social/emotional skills) so that people know how to discern useful information and evaluate sources and b) it has dreadful consequences when paired with the Dunning-Kruger effect. Smaller families might also contribute to this solipsistic overestimation of one's own capabilities, but that is just an idea that occured to me while writing this - I'd have to think it through some more.

If you pair inflated egos with a crumbling education system and a society signaling that it's okay to create your own reality, you get a high number of self-centered hobby experts convinced they and they alone understand "what is really going on".

"Get in the fucking sack!"

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

There does need to be more emphasis on expertise over entertaining opinions. One problem is that society needs to value education more. I've long thought that critics that write for publications should have to list their credentials, so that their opinions can be connected to their training and experience. During serious situations like this pandemic we are so used to the mindless talking heads of 24 hour news that culturally anyone entertaining with an opinion is worth a listen. If expertise is not valued, then information becomes a trash-heap of nonsense.

I don't know the best way to apply this principle, except that educational systems need to spend more time teaching critical thinking.

edit: I echoed some other well stated posts.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I will add that thinking for oneself does need to involve knowing ones own limits of understanding and knowledge. If someone has a greater knowledge base, it is responsible to listen, learn, and consider that perspective. To dismiss the knowledge presented by people with greater expertise is not 'thinking for oneself', but more akin to not thinking at all. Each individual does not have all the answers about the external world, but we all need to learn new information every day.

 

[Vendrah]

Very much this.

I have a theory in that regard. After WW II and the crimes against humanity that went with that era there was some serious reckoning with regard to mass psychology and authoritarianism. Education changed drastically and so the values transmitted. There was a massive increase in individualism in the Western world. There was a much greater emphasis on critical thinking, "think for yourself", "be skeptical", etc. That process became more pronounced in the last few decades and was probably accelerated a lot by the internet and its fast exchange f ideas and information and the possibility to seek out whatever people, ideas, and "facts" you like. Now, there is a lot to be said for that approach but a) it requires excellent education (both intellectual and social/emotional skills) so that people know how to discern useful information and evaluate sources and b) it has dreadful consequences when paired with the Dunning-Kruger effect. Smaller families might also contribute to this solipsistic overestimation of one's own capabilities, but that is just an idea that occured to me while writing this - I'd have to think it through some more.

If you pair inflated egos with a crumbling education system and a society signaling that it's okay to create your own reality, you get a high number of self-centered hobby experts convinced they and they alone understand "what is really going on".

"Get in the fucking sack!"

If what the "cartoon" message was correct than this thread would be senseless.

Its still a lack of real independent and good critical thinking. A lot of stuff are just copy and paste, and its exactly with these copy and paste that massive misinformation spread.

 

[Lark]

Everything You Know is Wrong: The Disinformation Guide to Secrets and Lies Edition: reprint: Amazon.co.uk: Russ Kick (Editor): 9781567317015: Books

Disinformation: The Complete Series by The Disinformation Company by Craig Melville Richard Metzger: Amazon.co.uk: DVD & Blu-ray

 

[Virtual ghost]

This is exactly why the terms like "media literacy" were invented.
Therefore the whole world will need to take a course in that through education. That should mild out the problem but more measures will probably be needed. Such as crashing or containing certain governments and organizations.