Writing is my artistic expression. My keyboard is my brush. Words are my medium. My blog is my canvas. And committing to writing daily makes me feel like an artist.
I’m already not a fan of the news. My wife will often watch the 6pm news and I usually put headphones on and listen to something else. A few days ago I was cutting some vegetables and the news was on in the background, and after 5 depressing reports one after another I had to stop listening.
Yesterday and today I had a number of news items cross my social media feed. One was a tragic incident in Korea where people were crushed and trampled. This is actual news, and, like above, very depressing. But a few other items were about news being faked or misinformation sharing.
Here is an example: A viral video of a politician being stopped by chanting audience members who were doing a derogatory chant… except in the actual footage the crowd is happily chanting the politician’s name. The fake version is the one going viral, and even making it onto supposed ‘news’ websites.
It’s bad enough that news is so negative to begin with, but it’s hard to weed out what’s real and what’s fake. It’s getting much harder to recognize the difference. And it’s getting even more important to be able to discern the difference. Do most people even try? Or do they just choose their news sources and narratives they want to follow and follow them blindly?
When I read any sensational headlines these days my first instinct isn’t to be shocked or enraged, my instinct is to question: Is this real? What’s the bias? Where should I look to fact check or validate this?
The news used to answer the questions who, what, where, when, how, and why… now it’s me that questions the news.
Daniel Funke shared a thread of images that are NOT from the current invasion of the Ukraine by Russia, but are being spread in social media as if they are from the current battle.
Today I read an article that stated, “Facebook has blocked Russian state media outlets from using its advertising platform or using other monetization features in response to the invasion of Ukraine.”
Its amazing that propaganda is so prevalent today when there is such easy access to information. But we are not living in an age where facts travel at the speed of fiction. Lies spread faster than truth. Sensationalism trumps information, and upset or outrage create the perfect venue for the re-sharing of fabricated stories that go viral.
Facts blend with fiction into a narrative that is anything but real news. What stories do the news stations in Moscow share with their citizens? How different does the news sound in neighbouring Belarus, compared to China, compared to news here in North America?
It’s easy to share narratives that match your own view, even if the source of the data is unreliable. We are living in an era when misinformation reigns. Social media has become an unstoppable misinformation machine, and every time we click a like, re-share, or forward a narrative that isn’t true, we become part of the machine. After all, we are the social in social media. We are cogs in the misinformation machine.
My grandfather had a saying, and I’ve shared it often, “Never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty but the pig likes it.”
The pig has some success no matter what. This is something that I think is playing out with anti-vax and conspiracy arguments… they have some success every time we argue. The reason for this success is that they are operating from a fixed mindset, their minds are made up… but they are often arguing with people who have a growth mindset and are open to some level of persuasion. It’s a guaranteed downward spiral, with some of their fixed and misguided ideas seeping into the consciousness of people who try to factor all things in to their understanding.
An example of this is when the twin towers fell in New York. There were all kinds of conspiracy theories that started with the premise that ‘steel towers can’t crumble like that just because a plane crashed into them’. Spoiler alert, they can. But at the time we had no examples to go by, no science to support the possibility, and so just raising this concern could put doubt into a reasonable person’s mind. Then came the videos. Google something like “twin tower conspiracy video” and you’ll see what I mean. These videos are well crafted and convincing.
If you are someone prone to the idea that there is some cabal that has a master plan to rule the world, the fall of the twin towers easily fits that narrative. However, if you are someone who looks at evidence and makes sound decisions based on the information you have, too much of this convincing misdirection and misinformation could influence your thinking. In other words the spread of well constructed fake news has influence on all parties… meanwhile simple logic and boring facts only work on those with growth mindsets willing to do the research work.
The pig wins the moment you engage you in the fight. They get you dirty. Here is a study done at MIT, ‘Does correcting online falsehoods make matters worse?‘, which looks at how pointing out mistakes doesn’t help the argument:
Not only is misinformation increasing online, but attempting to correct it politely on Twitter can have negative consequences, leading to even less-accurate tweets and more toxicity from the people being corrected, according to a new study co-authored by a group of MIT scholars.
The study was centered around a Twitter field experiment in which a research team offered polite corrections, complete with links to solid evidence, in replies to flagrantly false tweets about politics.
“What we found was not encouraging,” says Mohsen Mosleh, a research affiliate at the MIT Sloan School of Management, lecturer at University of Exeter Business School, and a co-author of a new paper detailing the study’s results. “After a user was corrected … they retweeted news that was significantly lower in quality and higher in partisan slant, and their retweets contained more toxic language.”
And the article goes on to say,
“We might have expected that being corrected would shift one’s attention to accuracy. But instead, it seems that getting publicly corrected by another user shifted people’s attention away from accuracy — perhaps to other social factors such as embarrassment.” The effects were slightly larger when people were being corrected by an account identified with the same political party as them, suggesting that the negative response was not driven by partisan animosity.
Now in this case the ‘evidence’ will often degrade, and so it may not be too convincing, but research like this suggests that the conspiracy or fake news spreader is very unlikely to change their minds given sound evidence against their ideas… but when their false ideas are well crafted and instil doubt, the same can’t be said for thoughtful people who aren’t fixed in their opinions.
Social media engagement is more likely to influence people towards believing aspects of fake news that to promote facts and sound evidence. It’s a downward spiral, and it’s getting us all a little dirty.
Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR or S/N) is a measure used in science and engineering that compares the level of a desired signal to the level of background noise. SNR is defined as the ratio of signal power to the noise power, often expressed in decibels. A ratio higher than 1:1 (greater than 0 dB) indicates more signal than noise. Wikipedia
This is a scientific term that relates to how much background noise there is interfering with the data or information you are trying to receive. A simple way to think about this is having a conversation in a party. If the noise of the party is too loud, you can’t pick up the signal (what the other person is saying). There is a point at which the noise does not interfere and the signal/communication is easy to hear, then moving along the scale the noise can interfere a little or a lot.
With machines this ratio is easy to calculate. With humans it’s a lot harder. It isn’t always about the quality of the signal, it’s also about the the willingness of the receiver to receive the signal. Sometimes people are not ready to receive the signal no matter how clear it is. Sometimes people choose to listen to the noise. Sometimes the noise is in their own head, not just coming from outside.
We are currently living in a world where a large number of people pay attention to the noise and are missing the signal altogether. A world where the noise is intentionally being spread. A world where the signal is considered noise. But humans aren’t machines, and so the noise isn’t easily calibrated and removed.
Social media used to amplify the signal, now it amplifies the noise. News used to amplify the signal, now it constantly reports about the problem of the noise, thus highlighting the noise and bringing it to everyone’s attention… not always in a negative light… or putting the signal and the noise on an equal footing as if to say here are two equal signals to be weighed and considered. As a result, communities, families, and friendships are being torn apart as they argue about what is signal and what is noise.
I’m reminded of the ‘More Cowbell’ skit on Saturday Night Live.
The noise is becoming too loud to receive the signal in any meaningful way. We need to simultaneously turn up the signal and turn down the noise. If not, we better get used to the cow bell.
This is an interesting time that we live in. I find myself in a position where I need to question my own values. I don’t do this lightly. I don’t pretend that my values have suddenly changed. It’s just that present circumstances put me at odds with my own beliefs around freedom of speech.
I am a strong believer in freedom of speech. I think that when a society sensors speech, they are on a dangerous path. I take this to an extreme. Except for slander, threats, and inciting violence, I think people have a right to say and believe what they want. I believe that taking away such freedom puts us on a perilous path where a select few get too much control, and can undermine our freedoms.
An example where I take this to the extreme would be agreeing with Noam Chomsky.
So now, even as an ardent defender of free speech, I find myself agreeing with YouTube’s decision to ban vaccine misinformation:
YouTube doesn’t allow content that poses a serious risk of egregious harm by spreading medical misinformation about currently administered vaccines that are approved and confirmed to be safe and effective by local health authorities and by the World Health Organization (WHO). This is limited to content that contradicts local health authorities’ or the WHO’s guidance on vaccine safety, efficacy, and ingredients.
Two, four, eight, or sixteen years ago when YouTube began, I would have screamed ‘Censorship!’ at the idea of a platform banning free speech. Even now it bothers me. But I think it is necessary. The first problem is that lies and misinformation are too easily shared, and spread too easily. The second problem is that the subject area is one where too many people do not have enough information to discern fact from fiction, science from pseudoscience. The third problem is that any authentic discussion about these topics is unevenly biased towards misinformation. This last point needs explanation.
If I wanted to argue with you that Zeus the Greek God produces lightning and thunder when he is angry, I think everyone today would say that I was stupid to think such a thing. However, if I was given an opportunity to debate a scientist on this in a public forum, what inadvertently happens is that my crazy idea now gets to have an equal amount of airtime with legitimate science. These two sides do not deserve equal airtime in a public, linkable, shareable format that appears to give my opinion an equal footing against scientific evidence.
Now when dealing with something as silly as believing in a thunder god is the topic, this isn’t a huge issue. But when it’s scientific sounding, persuading and fear mongering misinformation that can cause harm, that’s a totally different situation. When a single counter example, say for example a person having adverse effects from a vaccine, becomes a talking point, it’s hard to balance that in an argument with millions of people not having adverse effects and also drastically reducing their risk of a death the vaccine prevented. The one example, one data point, ends up being a scare tactic that works to convince some people hearing the argument that the millions of counter examples don’t matter. And when social media platforms feed similar, unbalanced but misleading information to people over and over again, and the social media algorithms share ‘similar’ next videos, or targeted misinformation, this actually gets dangerous. It threatens our ability to weigh fact from fiction, news from fake news, science from pseudoscience. It feeds and fosters ignorance.
I don’t know how else to fight this than to stop bad ideas from spreading by banning them?
This flies in the face of my beliefs about free speech, but I don’t know any alternative to prevent bad ideas from spreading faster than good ones. And so while I see censorship as inherently evil, it is a lesser evil to allowing ignorance to spread and go viral. And while it potentially opens a door to less freedom, and I have concerns about who makes the decision of what information should be banned, I’d rather see a ban like this attempted, than for us to continue to let really bad ideas spread.
I thought in this day and age common sense would prevail and there would be no need to censor most if not all free speech. However it seems that as a society, we just aren’t smart enough to discern truth from cleverly said fiction. So we need to stop the spread of bad ideas, even if that means less freedom to say anything we want.
I am dumbfounded by the news that people are self-medicating using a drug to treat livestock for parasites in order to ‘prevent’ or ‘cure’ themselves from covid-19… despite this being dangerous.
This is just batshit crazy. There is a large population of people that won’t take the vaccine because they don’t know what’s in it. Vaccines have been around since 1796, and have saved countless lives. Vaccines are proving that they are working, with drastic differences in Covid-19 hospitalization and deaths between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. The stats are so easy to see…
But these people will follow the advice of crackpots on Facebook and take a medicine designed for large livestock animals in unknown doses. These people are the same people that call anyone who gets the vaccine a sheep. Let that thought sink in.
These are people who get their information from that one crackpot doctor who knows more than every conventional doctor. They know someone, who knows someone, that this worked for. They know the government is out to get them, to strip them of their rights and freedoms and control them. And they skip by the articles on their crackpot pseudoscience news websites about chemtrails and alien created crop circles to get to the anti-vaccine ‘science’… not realizing that most people don’t get their facts from places where they have to choose their own conspiracy adventure.
We live in a world of easy access to too much information and miss-information, which feeds anyone’s beliefs. Information isn’t neutral… facts aren’t evenly distributed. I think that critical thinking might just be the most important skill of this century. Our biggest job in schools these days might just be developing kid’s bullshit detectors… before they start taking medication designed for bulls.
One of my pet peeves in education is people who talk about the fact that there are bad teachers, as if to say it is somehow unique to the teaching profession and not to any other profession. I’ve met proportionately very few teachers that I would consider bad compared to bad actors in many other professions. Another profession that seems to be low in bad actors, in my opinion, is medical doctors. Most people go into these professions wanting to serve and help others.
This is why I don’t understand the blatant disregard for well-being that seems to be present in anti-vaccine doctors. I went down a rabbit hole this morning, watching a well known podcaster, professor, and researcher speak to 2 doctors that clearly have compromised stances on covid 19. It was painful. Intelligent people making moronic claims [[update]]. One of them professing that he developed the MNRA vaccine process. One of them talking about about his carpet cleaner’s ailments after taking the vaccine, and how this person could not get anyone to share the horror of his story. I couldn’t get myself to watch the whole thing.
What I don’t understand is the motivation behind these otherwise intelligent people choosing to talk about science fiction and call it science? What’s the benefit? Who gains from this? Conspiracy theories depend on so many people acting in bad faith, people across the globe in different countries colluding and keeping secrets, all for the purpose of maintaining a narrative that makes no sense.
In BC, the spread of covid-19 in senior’s homes was an embarrassment. It benefited no one: not the homes that make money by recruiting more seniors; not the health municipalities that had to count the deaths; not the families that had to watch from a distance, unable to visit their loved ones. But it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that senior’s homes affected by covid had significantly more deaths than those not affected. Again, this was a provincial and even national embarrassment. Yet, conspiracy theorists talk about co-morbidity and try to pass these ‘extra’ deaths off as if they would have happened anyway. It’s so ignorant to do this, and yet it becomes a blanket statement that disregards examples like this that prove how dangerous this virus is.
And again for whose benefit? That’s the big question that baffles me? Who gains from promoting these dangerous ideas? I truly don’t know.
I’ve always been amazed by airplane flight. I don’t truly understand Bernoulli’s principle and the idea that so much weight can be lifted off the ground based simply on propulsion and lift under carefully designed wings still seems unlikely to me. And yet in less than 30 minutes the plane I’m on is going to taxi down a runway and start a 4,239 KM (2,634 mile) trek across (about half of) one of the largest countries in the world… and I’ll be sitting on a runway in Vancouver in 5 hours. Amazing.
We spend a lot of our day taking full advantage of technology we don’t really understand. I’m holding a phone that will magically publish this post to the internet, where it will sit on a website, all the while not knowing how this all works or what http stands for? I can talk to someone half way around the world with virtually no delay in the conversation, but sound travels much slower than that. I will listen to my wireless headphones without knowing how Bluetooth works. All around us we use advances in technology, taking advantage of tools most of us barely understand.
But this ignorance can work against us. Without really understanding the world around us, some people make shit up and think it’s science. How can anyone believe in a flat earth in this day and age of flight? And that’s not even the craziest thing people believe! It’s one thing to be blissfully ignorant of the world around us, and yet another to think that conspiracies live everywhere and that our opinions matter as much as the science.
Two amazing things that surround us:
1. The mystery and marvels of technology and innovation.
2. The blind ignorance of humanity to how this all works.
I’m not sure the gap between these two are getting any closer. The more amazing the the technology, the greater the opportunity for conflagration of lies, deceit, and exaggeration of fears into a dumpster fire of conspiracies, ‘fake news’, and ‘alternative facts’… with people knowingly and unknowingly adding fuel to the flames.
But for now, it’s time to put my phone on airplane mode, take advantage of having a window seat, and stare out at a runway… Marvelling at how this massively heavy plane can leave the surface of the earth, and soar for hours, trusting the science of it without really understanding how it all works.
I’m not pretending that I have a crystal ball, and can see into the future, but here are some predictions on the year ahead:
1. Vaccines.
A) In the developed world: despite growing evidence that vaccines are saving lives, there are going to be too many people that choose not to get them and the Delta variant (or another yet to be named variant) will bring prolonged restrictions that the very people refusing to get the vaccine will be the most vocal about.
B) In the developing world: It will be another year from now before many countries have enough vaccines to distribute two shots to every person that wants one… but in some of these countries it will be mandated, and that will be a new front of contention and fear mongering in ‘more free’ countries.
C) Booster shots (a 3rd dose) will not be seriously considered for at least 6 months to a year, if at all… but watch for news as elites decide to get it anyway, and while this won’t influence anti-vaxers to get their shots, many with 2 shots will want the 3rd shot as a security blanket.
2. Conspiracy theories.
These will flourish for two reasons:
A) Social media is too easily exploited by clever use of targeted advertising dollars, and fake news/information travels faster than boring but true facts.
B) The news plays easily into the hands of controversy = clicks = advertising dollars. Example: Share the story of an articulate 22 year-old choosing not to be vaccinated. Let her express her concerns for a minute, give a 30 second response, let her get the last word in. The controversy is more important than the science, and the news cast plays like an anti-vaxer advertisement… for free, with a large audience.
3. American Politics: The next year will decide the 2024 election. It is comical to me that some people still think the last election will be overturned… it won’t. However, I think Trump will make a lot of waves in the next year. While I won’t make a prediction as to weather he rides the wave or sinks, I think contention around the last election will be the counterbalance to Trump’s legal woes, and both of these will play into keeping his name in the news, and on the minds of Americans. If in a year he is not in legal hot water, then be warned that he could be a legitimate candidate in 2024.
4. Climate Change: Freakish weather will make this a hot topic for the next year. That said, not much will change with respect to doing something meaningful about it. Newsworthy, but somehow not change worthy.
5. Cryptocurrency: Countries will begin to adopt their own digital currencies. Paper bills will not be produced by most countries in 5 years, and this will be evident by next summer. Developing countries with massive inflation issues will lead the way.
6. Cancel culture: I’ll end on this, and in all honesty, I think this is a wish more than a prediction. I hope that there is some rebalancing around people being cancelled for poor indiscretions. What I mean by this is that someone saying something stupid can’t be treated as equally vile as someone who commits an evil crime. Human beings make mistakes. Two things matter when those mistakes are made. First, how much harm was caused? Second, what is the response/consequence?
I don’t think public/social media spaces are spaces where restitution and resolutions happen. Instead these sites become cesspools of anger, hate, rage, and an attack on people which prevents conversation and learning. Some of these attacks are worse than the indiscretion, but that doesn’t seem to matter.
I would like to see people provided a chance for redemption, rather than vilification and cancelation. We need to allow for learning and growth.
—–
That’s 5 predictions and a wish. I’ll set a calendar date for a year from now and see how I did.
I was in our local drug store yesterday and they were taking walk-ins for the covid-19 vaccine. People just needed to be 55 years old or older to get it. I’m a year and a half too young and so I couldn’t get mine. It was wonderful to see, but also so frustrating that I still have to wait. I know it’s not a quick fix, I know I work in schools where students will not be vaccinated for quite some time. I know we will have strict protocols right through the end of June, and potentially when we start up in September again. I know all this, but I feel like I’m in perpetual limbo waiting for my turn to get the vaccine.
I also wonder about all the people choosing not to take the vaccine. Vaccines are not perfect, but neither are countless over the counter drugs that people use every day. For instance, ibuprofen is a drug many people take way too frequently and can be very bad for you. Here is some information about ibuprofen:
“Regular use of ibuprofen may eventually cause:
kidney and liver damage
bleeding in the stomach and bowels
increased risk of heart attack.”
And, “NSAIDs such ibuprofen can increase the risk of heart attack or stroke in people with or without heart disease or the risk factors for heart disease.”
In a global pandemic, no vaccine is going to be perfect, but the fear mongering and paranoid opportunists have pushed the anti-vax stupidity to what would be comical levels if the consequences of their stupidity weren’t spreading so quickly. I’m frequently surprised by people sharing concerns about the vaccine who seem to have very limited understanding of what research has been done, people who confuse RNA with DNA, and people who cherry pick their information from biased news sources and spout their bias as ‘facts’.
All this leads me to think that when I finally get the vaccine, while I’ll sigh a little sigh of relief, and while I’ll do a little happy dance… I just might find myself in the same limbo a while longer. I’m not sure it’s going to bring me as much comfort as I would like it to.
