Tag Archives: News

Manufacturing Lies and Dissent

In “Manufacturing Consent,” Noam Chomsky argues that the mass media in the US serves as a propaganda tool for powerful elites, shaping public perception to maintain the status quo. I think that era has ended and one of the key points of our time is that social media now ‘manufactures dissent’. It permits lies to spread faster than truth, and is driven by the power of outlandish claims to draw attention and clicks, views and advertising dollars.

The irony of what I’m about to share would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.

Yesterday when I shared my Daily-Ink on Twitter/X, I saw a headline, “Musk’s hurricane of misinformation has finally gone too far”, shared by ‘Independent Voices’, a Twitter account I don’t follow.

I clicked and read the article on the UK’s Independent (independent.co.uk), a media site that I’m unaware of so I was careful to watch for accuracy versus misinformation.

For example, even when the article quoted a tweet by Marjorie Taylor Greene, a person elected to Congress whom I think acts like telling the truth could cause an anaphylactic response, I still followed the link to fact check it…Even though her ridiculous claim was easily within the scope of believability.

The article states,

“Yet despite the clear and evident risk of real harm, people like Greene are making hackneyed comic book villain claims about secret weather machines – and the internet has been rife with misinformation about the upcoming disaster. Accounts on Twitter/X have claimed that state and federal officials are preventing people from accessing hard-hit areas, that the government is basing its provision of aid on political affiliation, and that the entire thing is an elaborate land-grab scheme.

Many such posts have received millions of views, and few if any are being taken down. Why would they, when the site’s owner is in the mix – yes, even Elon Musk has been getting in on the fun, tweeting that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) has diverted critical funds from hurricane relief to illegal immigrants.”

Later it continues,

“Now, you might be thinking to yourself, “spreading misinformation about a natural disaster that has the potential to kill hundreds – perhaps thousands – of people is reprehensible, and in a sane world would be a criminal offence”, but you would in fact be mistaken. You see, we don’t live in a sane world. We live in a world where being that reckless with other people’s lives isn’t just acceptable – it’s actually a core part of the Republican political strategy.”

But shortly after reading that quote I passed an ad in the article that proves that ‘We live in a world where being reckless with other people’s lives IS acceptable’ and not just by people on the right. The ad, which I refused to click on stated, “Jagmeet Singh Suffers Fatal Accident On Live Television”.

An article that is simultaneously debunking misinformation of a right wing political party, with the author asking, “The thing that really baffles me about all of this, though, is what exactly there is to be gained here.” …Which also shares an ad that blatantly lies about the death of a left wing Canadian political party leader, is painfully ironic.

I then checked The Independent on the Media Bias / Fact Check website which stated that “Overall we rate The Independent Left-Center Biased due to story selection that moderately favors the left. We also rate them Mixed in factual reporting due to several failed fact checks.”

This demonstrates a clear case of the kettle calling the pot black. Bash the right for spreading misinformation on a left leaning site, while advertising using blatant misinformation. I want to call this unacceptable, but it’s the norm.

Propagating lies, evoking anger, selling out for attention, baiting clicks with misinformation, and manufacturing dissent. We can no longer trust social media, and we must question mainstream media too. The truth is unnecessarily elusive, it’s lost in a sea of lies and inaccuracies. The above news article isn’t inaccurate in its conclusions, rather it’s simply encapsulated in the same misinformation propagating media machine it professes to be struggling to understand.

Information is free, Truth takes effort

We live in an era where:

Lies spread faster than the truth

There is worldwide concern over false news and the possibility that it can influence political, economic, and social well-being. To understand how false news spreads, Vosoughi et al. used a data set of rumor cascades on Twitter from 2006 to 2017. About 126,000 rumors were spread by ∼3 million people. False news reached more people than the truth; the top 1% of false news cascades diffused to between 1000 and 100,000 people, whereas the truth rarely diffused to more than 1000 people. Falsehood also diffused faster than the truth. The degree of novelty and the emotional reactions of recipients may be responsible for the differences observed.

Science, 9 Mar 2018, p. 1146-1151

Media, and even more-so social media, can’t be trusted. And in fact, if it is eye-catching and click-bait worthy it will be sensationalized and potentially untrue. We live in an era of unlimited information and much of it is not factual, and not easily verifiable.

What can we do? I’ve said before that ‘Web Domains Matter’, and they do, but we still need to recognize that even new sites considered reputable have biases.

So we are required to take new information in as skeptics. Meanwhile we have to balance our scepticism with a dose of common sense or we could easily fall down the conspiracy rabbit hole. This is the new normal, this is being information savvy. This does not mean we will get to the Truth. Because it’s not just the information coming in that has bias, we have our own biases too.

We all have work to do, to understand some sort of relevant small ‘t’ truth that is in fact closely related to the capital ’T’ Truth. To find our way amidst an endless stream of information that favours misinformation, fake news, and half-truths. The rabbit hole runs deep, and we are all on a journey down it… with Artificial Intelligence creating a whole new level of generating convincing fakes that are easily believed, and algorithmically shared way more than anything truthful.

Start with the source, where is the information coming from? Apply a sliding scale of scepticism depending on the reliability of the source. Then be savvy in deciding what to believe and what to dismiss.

Source, scepticism, and savviness… the new path to information literacy.

With a Discerning Eye

Yesterday, when I wrote ‘The inverted political bell curve’ about how politically many people have moved to the extremes. I ended by saying, “The bell curve is gone, only warring tribes remain, and the fighting is just going to get uglier.”

There are many reasons why I think this is true, and I think we are headed into a period before the US election where truth will be hard to discern, and extremist views will go viral. But I also think that many people can see it coming and will be ready. They will question, they will fact check, they will doubt the accuracy of what’s being spewed their way.

Will the extremes be loud, and will their messages be filled with personal attacks and un-researched facts that are actually fiction and propaganda? Yes.

But not everyone is going to listen. There are some savvy people who will be watching with a discerning eye. They will be the voices of reason. They will be as interested in determining the intent of the message as they will be in listening to it. They will hear something bad about a candidate they dislike, and still question the validity of what’s being said.

I don’t think this group will be a majority, but they will be present. And while yesterday I sounded like I saw a future of doom and gloom ahead of us, I also see some promise that not everyone is polarized and sitting on the extremes. And that keeps me hopeful that things might not get as messy as they could.

Watch the news and messaging on social media with a discerning eye in the coming months… question, fact check, and take the time to understand the context of things being quoted. We need common sense to prevail.

The cult of conspiracy

I read this quote in Tim Ferriss’ 5-Bullet Friday email newsletter:

“I sometimes wonder whether conspiracy theories are an attempt to re-enchant the world in a distorted way. It’s like religion knocking on the door and trying to come back in a strange and distorted form. A sense of mystery beyond our own understanding of the world. If you ever talk to conspiracy theorists, that’s the sense you get from them. A sort of almost romantic sense of awe that there is this dark mysterious thing that a rational thing could never penetrate.” ~ Adam Curtis

Having a dad who was constantly making connections across seemingly unrelated topics, all for which he found resounding ‘evidence’ of conspiracies, this quote resonated with me. With an inclination towards conspiracy came a blind willingness to accept wild, unreliable sources of any information or claims that supported the conspiratorial narrative. Crazy, unsubstantiated theories were treated as fact.

Whenever I brought up counter arguments, and shared anything to suggest inaccuracies in a conspiracy I would get the same retort: “Who is fact checking the fact checkers, David?” Then Dad would send me an article, I’d click a link to some ‘fact’ that it mentions and it would lead to a warning page that I was going to a known Russian propaganda website. In all my years on the internet, I’d never been redirected to a page like this, except from the ‘reliable’ sources my dad followed.

“Dad, did you know the source of this information is a Russian propaganda website?”

“Even bad sources get the information right sometimes David.” This from a scientist, a man dedicated to research and detailed documentation. But the grasp of the conspiracy came from deep within, like a core faith, a religious grip that broke common sense,

A sort of almost romantic sense of awe that there is this dark mysterious thing that a rational thing could never penetrate.”

It’s not about rational thought, nor common sense. It’s a new, distorted form of religion. Faith does not require reason, it does not follow logic. But it holds on to people and steers them in directions they are unaware that they are going. 100 pieces of counter-evidence can go blindly by, and then a crumb of evidence in support will be enough to fuel the conspiracy and shield it against the next 100 counterpoints.

Conspiracies are mysterious, even romantic. The people who follow them bear witness, they see the light, they are the believers, the keepers of the faith, the chosen ones. Logic and reason do not alter the faith of the devout… and so the cult of conspiracy continues.

almost free

The internet needs a makeover. I remember when I wanted to make a fun certificate or a personalized card, I could just do a Google search and find a free resource. Now when you do it, the top 10+ sites found in the search all require you to register, login, sign up, or sign in with Google or Facebook. Don’t worry, your first 30 days are free, or you’ll need to put your email in to get promotional spam sent to your inbox.

I get it. It costs money to run a website. I know, I pay to keep DavidTruss running and thanks to some affiliate links I’ve made about $35-$40 over the past 15 years. Add another $15 if you include royalties from my ebook, which I give away free everywhere except on Amazon where I couldn’t lower the price. This is my sarcastic way of saying that I don’t make any money off of my blogging and I actually have to pay to keep it running. That’s fine for me, I don’t do this for an income, but most websites need a flow of cash coming in to keep them going.

But no matter how you look at it, things on the internet have gotten a lot less free over the past decade. My blog’s Facebook page doesn’t make it onto most people’s stream because I don’t pay to boost the posts. Twitter, since it became X, has been all about seeing paid-for blue check profiles and my stream feels like it caters to ‘most popular or outlandish tweets’ rather than people I actually enjoy following. Even news sites are riddled with flashy advertising and gimmicky headlines to keep your eyes on those ads.

There needs to be a way to keep things ‘almost free’ on the internet, while not inundating us with attention seeking ads, or making us register and give away our email address to be spammed by promotional messages we don’t want. I think it will come. I think there will be an opportunity to choose between ads or micropayments. Read the kind of news you want or listen to a podcast for a penny. Like what you read/hear? Give a dime, or quarter, or even a dollar if you really like it.  There are already people donating this way on Live events on YouTube and Twitch and other similar sites, it just needs to get to the point where it’s happening on any web page. I’d rather pay a tiny bit than be inundated with ads. It’s coming, but not before it gets worse… we now have ads coming to Netflix and Prime. They want us to pay MORE to avoid them. The model is still about exploitation rather than building a fan base. Subscriptions will dominate for a while and so will models that upsell you to reduce the clutter… but eventually, eventually we will see the return of the ‘almost free’.

High versus low trust societies

I love when someone adds to my perspective on social media. That’s exactly what happened after I posted Basic assumptions a couple days ago. The post reflected that, “people no longer give each other the benefit of the doubt that intentions are good. This used to be a basic assumption we operated on, the premise that we can start with the belief that everyone is acting in good faith.

I shared the post on Twitter and Chris Kalaboukis and I had the following conversation thread:

Chris: Reading your post: could we be transitioning from a high-trust to a low-trust society?

Dave: Yes, that seems like an appropriate conclusion. Is there an author that speaks of this idea?

Chris: Not that I can recall, however, if you look at the attributes of low-trust societies you see a lot of what is happening now.

Dave: So true! The circle of high trust seems to be shrinking and it really seems like a step backwards… tribalism trumps the collective of a greater community.

Chris: It is. It seems that even our institutions are driving us towards more tribalism and division.

Dave: And how do you suppose we correct this course? I honestly don’t have a clue, and see things getting worse before they get better.

Chris: I think that in reality, most people prefer to live in a high-trust society. We need leaders and media who support that vision.

Dave: I think the biggest problem right now is that most leaders do not want to step into a limelight where both social media and news outlets are only interested in focussing on the dirt. It seems everyone is measured by their worst transgressions, regardless of many positive deeds.

Chris: If it bleeds it leads. we’ve never been able to communicate with more people at the same time but the only communication which seems to get through is negative. It’s all about keeping your attention to sell more ads.

Dave: I sound like quite the pessimist, that’s not usually my stance on things, but I do struggle to see a way forward from here.

—–

The idea Chris shared that we could be ‘transitioning from a high-trust to a low-trust society’ seems insightful and really intrigues me. It isn’t happening at just one level, but many!

• Scam phone calls and emails are perfect examples. We used to operate from a position of trust, but now unknown calls and unsolicited emails are all necessarily met with skepticism.

• Sensationalized news leads with misleading headlines that are more about getting attention and clicks than about providing truthful news. And if the news slant doesn’t match your beliefs, it’s ‘fake news’.

• Sales pitches and advertising promises almost everything under the sun, you aren’t buying a product with a basic function, you are buying a product that is going to change your life or transform how you do ‘X’, or use ‘Y’… your results will surprise you and you’ll be amazed!

• If you are even slightly left wing you are ‘woke’ or ‘Antifa’ in the most derogatory way you can use these words. If you are even slightly right wing you are ‘Alt-right’ and racist. No one gets to sit on a spectrum, you are either viewed as an extreme on one or the other side. And even agreeing on one topic on the other side makes you less trustworthy on your side.

These are but a few ways we’ve become a lower-trust society. Ad hominem and straw man attacks get more attention than sound arguments. A well said lie is easily shared while complex truths are not. Saying a situation is complex and sharing nuance does not make for catchy sound bites, and aren’t going to go viral on TikTok, or Instagram Reels. No, but the snarky personal attack will, as will a one-sided, extreme view that packs a powerful punch.

What’s worse is that moderate voices get shut out. And in general many people feel silenced or would rather not share a view that is even slightly controversial. So the extreme voices get even more airtime and attention.

I feel this often. Writing every day, and sometimes picking controversial topics to discuss, I find myself tiptoeing and treading very carefully. I said in my Twitter conversation with Chris above, “It seems everyone is measured by their worst transgressions, regardless of many positive deeds.” I sometimes wonder what one thing I’m going to say is going to get blown out of proportion? If I write one single inappropriate or strongly biased phrase, will it define me? Will it undermine the 1,500+ posts that I’ve written, and make me out to be something or someone I’m not?

This sounds paranoid, but I wrote one post a few years ago that a friend private messaged me about, then called me and said I’d gone too far with my opinion on a specific point. I totally saw his point, went back and adjusted my post to tone it down… but I feel like that one issue, that one strong and overly biased opinion shared publicly put a rift in our friendship. And that’s someone I respect, not some stranger coming at me, not someone that doesn’t know my true character. My opinion in his eyes is now less trustworthy, and holds less value. That said, I appreciated the feedback, and respect that he took the time to share it privately. That’s rare these days.

The path forward is not easy. We aren’t just swaying slightly towards a less trustworthy society, we are on a full pendulum swing away from a more trustworthy society. Tribalism, nationalism, and extremism are pulling our world apart. Who do you trust? What institutions? Which governments? Who do you consider a neighbour? Who will you break bread with? Who do you believe?

The circles of trust are getting smaller, and the mechanisms to share bias and misinformation are growing. We are devolving into a less trusting society or rather societies, and it’s undermining our sense of community. We need messages of kindness, love, and peace to prevail. We need tolerance, acceptance, and more than anything trustworthy institutions and leaders. We need moderates and centrists to voice compromise and minimize extremist views. We need to rebuild a high trust society… together.

Untruth and Truth Bombs

Here it comes. It didn’t take long. The unrest in the Middle East has already led to a flood of fake news, videos, and photos. Video of past battles are showing up as if they are current. Clips from video games are being passed off as current battles. And AI generated or modified videos and photos are being passed off as real.

Waves of untruths, fake news, and misinformation are being spewed out and shared virally. There isn’t a video clip, news heading, or photograph you can take for face value as being a truthful account of events that actually happened.

Except that some of it is real. Some of it is too real. Before it can be edited or censored, there will be some very graphic videos and images that will be spread across social media. Even respectable media sources will over-share overly violent clips, but on these sights there will be a pre-warning of what’s to come and some of the video will be blurred out to protect the audience or the victims, or both.

Warning or not, truth or untruth, we’ve entered an era where we, and our kids, are likely going to see things that never would have been shown just a few short years ago. No matter what social media you use, you’ll likely be exposed to graphic images too real to stomach, even if they are actually fake.

I don’t know what to worry about more, graphic images or fake images? What’s the worst bomb dropped, the truth bomb or the untruth bomb? Neither are good, and both are headed to a social media platform near you. In fact, they are already there.

—–

Update: Great article from Forbes on the topic of deepfakes spreading virally, “In A New Era Of Deepfakes, AI Makes Real News Anchors Report Fake Stories“.

New tools, old borders

For the 3rd or 4th time this year I’ve tried to sign up for a new AI tool only to find out that it isn’t available in Canada yet. I get it, I understand that there are specific rules and regulations in each country. I know that Canada often lags behind other countries because there are language laws requiring tools to offer policies and pricing etc. in both French and English. I even know that many of these rules are to help me, the consumer. That said, I find it frustrating that red tape is an innovative restriction. The speed of creativity and ingenuity is faster than ever, and we can’t seem to figure out how to keep the opportunities open and equal.

And yes, I understand this topic is complex. How complex? “All news in Canada will be removed from Facebook, Instagram within weeks: Meta“. It’s messy merging rules for access with rules to support consumers and be protective of Canadian content. But when new laws are drawn up, they need to come from a place of cooperation, not restriction; collaboration, not exclusivity.

It may not seem like a big deal to have to wait longer than most to get access to some cool tools, but that wait comes at a price… A price I think Canadians are going to pay for quite some time before innovation trumps protectionism. It is what it is/C’est comme ça.

Digital vomit

In his recent ‘Making Sense’ podcast, Sam Harris said this:

“Every part of culture: Science, public health, war, economics, the lives of famous people, conspiracy theories about everything and nothing… All information is in the process of being macerated by billions of tiny mouths and then spit back again, and lapped up by others. So what is in fact actually digital vomit, at this point, is being spread everywhere. And celebrated as some form of nutrition.”

Unfortunately this is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. It’s not just ‘billions of tiny mouths’ that are going to be spewing digital vomit, it’s going to be a massive machine of propaganda networks spewing AI created disinformation, vitriol, fake news, and falsified ‘evidence’ to back up the vomit it produces.

And while you would hope mainstream media would be the balancing force to combat this digital vomit, this is not the case. Mainstream media does not have a foothold in truth-telling. Don’t believe me? Watch MSNBC and Fox News side-by-side and you’ll see completely different coverage of the same event. You’ll see minor threats described as crises. If it’s not an emergency it’s not news… so it’s an emergency.

So prepare for a lot more digital vomit. Start trying to figure out how to mop up the mess, to make sense of the mess, because it’s going to get very messy!

Superconductors and aliens

What a crazy bit of news out the last couple days! Ambient temperature and pressure superconductors could change the world and so too could the admission that we are not alone in the universe. Both of these are things that deserve scrutiny and further evidence. That said, what an exciting time to be alive.

Room temperature superconductivity has been a physics Nobel Prize waiting to happen. So much of the energy we use is lost in transmission. Furthermore, this invention will make nuclear fusion containable, without significant cost and dangers of a breach because superconductors used for plasma containment won’t need to sustain unbelievably cold temperatures next to an extremely hot process. In other words, energy is about to get a lot easier to produce and share.

As for aliens, I think there is enough evidence to say that there are flying vehicles that do things human-made vehicles can’t. Whether aliens are in these vehicles or if they are run remotely (they pull some high g-force moves that would destroy a human), they are definitely not human made. So what are they, and who/what made them?

I’m mixing my enthusiasm with a dose of scepticism, but unlike most other news stories, these are two I’m going to be watching!