Are you as clever about fake news as you think?

Screen Shot 2017-07-16 at 09.45.45

From Lifehacker:

The web game displays actual news stories that have been published around the web, along with source information. Your job is to determine whether what you’re reading is real or fake —and it’s not as easy as it looks.

pub. 07/2017

 

Advertisements

A short meditation on US propaganda and politics in the 20th century

Screen Shot 2017-06-16 at 08.11.29

“Democracy is never a thing done,” MacLeish said. “Democracy is always something that a nation must be doing.”…

…Critics called MacLeish naïve: winning a war requires deception. F.D.R., to some degree, agreed. In June, 1942, he replaced the Office of Facts and Figures with the Office of War Information.

pub. 06/2017

Published in the paper edition as “The Strategy of Truth”; audio version here.

A deep dive into Trump/Russia background and history, plus believable speculation

Screen Shot 2017-05-30 at 16.47.40

You’ve probably heard plenty of hushed whispers or outright panic about Russia’s information warfare against the West, but it’s seldom been put in context. We’re going to fix that in our deep dive into exactly how the Trump/Russia saga unfolded. This is one of the most consequential stories of our lifetime, and it’s not over, so get ready to bookmark this piece now.

pub. 05/2017

Audio + Transcript: The deep-rooted, inflexible source of some Trump support

Screen Shot 2017-04-25 at 15.08.38

Audio at link, transcript here.

Lakoff: Boy, did he know what he was doing. He knew perfectly well what he was doing. First of all, there are in this country about 35 percent of Americans who have what I call a strict father morality…

…[If] you look at history, you will see that the strict fathers win. And you can take a look at who wins, and they win because they’re right. That morality and authority go together, that the strict father knows right from wrong. So that if you want to see who’s better than who, you look at who beat who….

…That is what Trump not only believes, he hacks and he assumes is correct. And he knows that about 35 percent of the country — the 35 percent who still support him — that, you know, who also believe this, even if they’re poor…. It’s self-definition, and people don’t vote against their self-definition. Not only that, it doesn’t matter if Trump lies to them, and they know he’s lying, because there’s a higher truth, which is strict father morality itself, which has consequences and that they are truer than any lies. And that if you deny that, if you accept the lies as more important, you’re denying your self-identity. That is why there are alternative facts.

(Quote from transcript) pub. 04/2017

A new era, a new type of propaganda

screen-shot-2017-02-28-at-13-57-52

“The danger of not having regulation around the sort of data you can get from Facebook and elsewhere is clear. With this, a computer can actually do psychology, it can predict and potentially control human behaviour. It’s what the scientologists try to do but much more powerful. It’s how you brainwash someone. It’s incredibly dangerous.”

pub. 02/2017

Social success is more important to us than accuracy

screen-shot-2017-02-28-at-09-47-17

“As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding,” Sloman and Fernbach write. And here our dependence on other minds reinforces the problem. If your position on, say, the Affordable Care Act is baseless and I rely on it, then my opinion is also baseless. When I talk to Tom and he decides he agrees with me, his opinion is also baseless, but now that the three of us concur we feel that much more smug about our views. If we all now dismiss as unconvincing any information that contradicts our opinion, you get, well, the Trump Administration.

pub. 02/2017

Perhaps when discussing these issues with someone on “the other side”, the most effective route might be an innocent “You know, I don’t understand this issue/policy well. How does it actually work?” I wonder if, as they work through a response and your follow-up questions, the other person might talk themselves out of their certainty.