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.
When I was a kid I used to watch Get Smart, a ridiculous comedy about a bumbling secret agent who seemed to always accidentally solved his case. Whenever his boss was going to tell him something top secret, Max, agent 99, would insist on using the cone of silence… a device that succeeded in preventing them from hearing each other, and could always be heard from the audience’s perspective, outside of the cone.
I sometimes try to put myself in a cone of silence, not watching the news, not paying attention to social media posts related to news events, not discussing anything related to the news. I try to block things out for a couple days and just live in blissful ignorance of the world beyond my daily life.
Does it work? Not always. But every now and then it’s fun to try.
As we watch war and resistance play out in the Ukraine, we are watching it from the film footage of civilians. Phones have become weapons against propaganda, weapons against tyranny, weapons of war. Instead of the story being told by a handful of brave reporters, anyone with a phone is now reporting and sharing updates.
These videos are being mapped and checked for authenticity, and they are being shared on social media. The battle might be being played out in the Ukraine, but it’s also being replayed all over the world. And now Elon Musk’s Starlink will ensure that the videos keep coming.
Resistance is now a shared global experience. The phone camera has become a weapon against tyranny.
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.
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’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 will admit that I’ve been critical of the vaccine rollout in Canada. I really thought that it took much too long to get things started. However, I now have to say that I’m very impressed with how things are going. Have a look at this chart as of yesterday:
It seems that Canada’s strategy of getting the first shot to as many people as possible is paying off. I get my second shot next week, and I just read that the new Canadian goal is to have every person from the age of 12 and up to be able to get their second shot by September… every person that wants it.
That’s the new challenge we face, how many people in our population will not choose to get vaccinated? With the Delta variant hitting the unvaccinated population extremely hard, Covid-19 is proving to be hearty and resilient. The Delta variant spreads very easily, and on average causes much harsher symptoms, putting more people in hospital than other variants.
Reducing the threat of this variant, and subsequent variants is best done with a comprehensive vaccine rollout. Reduce the likelihood of spread, and you also reduce the likelihood of mutation and new variants. The spread of measles provides a good lesson for us. Measles is preventable by vaccine and numbers have gone down for years heading into 2010. But the last decade has seen spikes due to anti-vaccine sentiment, and a larger population of unvaccinated kids in different populations.
Canada is lucky. For such a large country, we don’t have a massive population, and the population we do have predominantly lives in a narrow band near the US border. So, not many people, but mostly living in a concentrated area. This makes vaccine distribution easier on two fronts. The third and final frontier is the willingness of the population to do their part.
Our younger generation seems to be more willing to do their part than in other countries. As soon as the 18+ population were given the opportunity to get a vaccine in Canada, uptake has been good. Since younger age groups seems hard hit by the Delta variant in England, it is comforting to know that the Canadian population that had to wait the longest for their turn at getting the first shot have been so willing.
It’s good news all around in Canada, and so now as the vast majority of the population lines up for their 2nd shot, it’s my hope that we also see more people take advantage of their first shot. This is the challenge ahead of us. Not the rollout of the second shot, that is going very well. Rather it’s the rollout of the first shot to the population who seems hesitant to do their part. The closer we get to full immunity, the more likely we are to be protected from dangerous variants spreading through our communities… and our loved ones.
I’m becoming more and more disappointed with news reporting. Journalism has become a way to tell a predetermined story, with the focus being to exaggerate a narrative that is negative. Here are two examples:
1. TV – A report on the AstraZeneca vaccine in Canada. A large amount of the vaccine is is about to expire, but because of the fear of blood clots, which is extremely low, officials are acting slow in deciding what to do with this supply of vaccines. In the report, they mention that the blood clot risk for the second shot is significantly lower than than the low risk with the first shot. Then they interview a woman who had her first AstraZeneca shot and is cautious and doubtful about having the second shot. She becomes the story. Not two people with different views, one saying yes, and one saying no… just the cautious perspective.
2. Newspaper – This is a message from our local paper to our Valedictorian:
The Tri-City News is reaching out to SD43 valedictorians about what it’s like to graduate during Year 2 of the pandemic.
Can you please write two paragraphs — no longer than 150 words in total — about your Grade 12 experience, and describe what it’s like for you and your fellow grads to transition without any official ceremony?
Congratulations valedictorians, please write to us and tell us the reasons why you are disappointed with your last year of school.
What an awful thing to ask!
In both of these news stories the focus of the story is one that stirs emotions, not to benefit anyone, simply to prey on the emotions of the audience. I’m seeing this time and again. The question isn’t ‘what is the story here?’, the story is ‘what will get the most watches, clicks, likes, and shares… at the expense of good reporting.
I find myself wondering, is real journalism dead? I hope not. But I don’t know the way forward? It seems to me that this kind of negative reporting hits a chord that less biased news does not… and in a very competitive market for people’s attention, stirring negative emotions makes for better views. What’s the way forward from here?
With news like, ‘January has been the worst month for Covid-19 deaths in the US’, and ‘Getting the vaccine doesn’t mean you can travel’, it is a bit of a reminder that we are not out of the woods yet. Now a year into the pandemic, (we just had the anniversary of the first covid case in Canada), it feels a bit like Groundhog Day, the Bill Murray movie where he wakes up repeatedly on the same day.
Keep wearing a mask and keeping socially distanced… Keep your bubble small, avoid unnecessary public outings and travel… Meet digitally whenever possible. These are things we are used to hearing and doing. And while a year into this pandemic we might be a bit tired of doing these things, it needs to sink in that 2021 could be a whole lot of the same.
My thoughts: If everything goes well, it could be September before we get close to vaccinating enough of the population to truly ease up on our personal restrictions. More likely, we are looking at January 2022. That’s another year away. I think things will get much better, but the path will be slower than everyone wants.
That’s tough to think about when it feels like we’ve been in limbo for such a long time already. It’s tough to keep diligent and be thoughtful about always being careful. But it’s necessary.
Set some personal wellness goals and set aside time to be outside and/or meditate. Make the year ahead one where you improve or enjoy yourself in some way. Take up a hobby or interest that doesn’t require other people. From scrapbooking, to reading fiction, to tinkering around with electronics, to buying a 3D printer, to knitting, to watching award winning movies from the 80’s and 90’s, to flying drones, to running 5 or 10km regularly, there are things you can do that promise to be rewarding or entertaining. While social opportunities are not available, we need not have our minds remain in limbo. 
That said: Be patient. Be smart. Be diligent. Be well. Stay safe.
It is wishful thinking to hope that people will not be fooled again by QAnon. This is a sad but true statement. The reality is that people are natural puzzle solvers who seek to make connections. We want to make sense of the world, and this leaves some people vulnerable to suggestions that there are connections that are not really there.
Our brains extrapolate, they naturally extend ideas. This has made us incredibly inventive and creative people. This has not helped us distinguish fact from fiction. This is where extrapolation goes very wrong. I think the problem is that while our brains are seeking to extrapolate and extend ideas, they are stimulated towards possible connections and simultaneously let down our bullshit detectors. Our brains really struggle to seek new connections while at the same time make good judgements about those connections we are seeking.
Have you ever played 2 Truths and a Lie?
Try to pick out my lie:
1. I’ve illegally bungee jumped off of a local bridge.
2. I cheated on, and successfully passed, the LSAT.
3. I stole a neighbour’s car when I was 17, dented the fender, and put it back without him knowing I took it.
Which one did you pick?
I know this doesn’t paint a very nice picture of me. I wanted you to see my dark side. Now before you even pick the lie, you are probably extrapolating things about me and the kind of person I really am. You also probably extrapolated that statement #3 was a truth because it is more believable and more detailed than the other two.
However, here is a strategy I used: I told 3 lies. In one easy step, I could’ve convinced you that 2 lies are true. It’s that easy to convince someone of a lie… or in this case 2 lies.
I’ve never bungee jumped, never wrote the LSAT, and never stolen a car. But had I not told you that, had I picked one as the lie, you probably would have believed the other two. What’s scary is, the more you know me, and the more credibility I have, the easier it is for me to fool you.
Here is an example in the media: This is how people like Tucker Carlson can dupe viewers over and over again. In this article, Fox News lawyers argued in court that Carlson is not ‘stating actual facts’ about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in ‘exaggeration’ and ‘non-literal commentary.’
They argued this in a libel lawsuit where Carlson was being sued and, “The Court concludes that the statements are rhetorical hyperbole and opinion commentary intended to frame a political debate.” Fox News told the court that this is what Tucker Carlson does, he doesn’t report news… and the judge agreed and they won the case. Think about this! Fox News said Tucker Carlson’s show is not news, but just exaggerated opinion.
However, he is broadcasted on a ‘News’ show, that gives him credibility. To a fan of his: He is in ‘your’ living room with you 5 nights a week. And he feeds you tiny little, often convincing lies… or should I say ‘exaggerated opinions’. Next you go to even less reliable websites and you hear the Tucker Carlson lies being repeated. Other lies are added to the things you know are true because you heard it on Fox ‘News’ from your buddy Tucker Carlson, and you extrapolate that these must be true too.
That’s right Dave is a car thief, oh and he cheated on the LSAT’s, and I seem to recall that he illegally jumped off a bridge too… The other interesting thing about our memory is that we don’t often remember what the lie was and we can easily put the lie in with the other ‘truths’.
Some people eventually catch on.
Many others will get fooled again. It’s sad but true.
I know I’ve been writing a lot recently about QAnon, anti-makers, and anti-vaxxers. I’m going to continue that today with a bit of a rant:
Is it just me that thinks these conspiracy theory spinners are just idiots? I mean one crazy idea leads to another, which leads to another. They tie so many BS ideas together that you can’t keep track. And when one idea is debunked or one deadline for catastrophe is missed, it doesn’t diminish their fervour for the next conspiracy… debunking one idea does not phase their beliefs on the topic or any other topic, despite the fact that they are the ones making the connections. What’s worse, they seem to always want evidence, but refuse to believe any evidence provided is real.
Is it just me that thinks police should take water guns filled with blue food colouring to anti-mask protests and spray it all over them? If protesters are going to endanger themselves, let’s paint their faces blue for a couple weeks so that we can keep our distance from them when they return to normal society. That way when they come back from the protest and put masks on, and we usually can’t tell they were participating in risky behaviour, we would still know to keep very clear from them.
Is it just me that thinks we should enforce travel bans on people that refuse the vaccine? And while we are at it, if they end up in a hospital with expensive covid related issues after refusing the vaccine, they should have to pay medical bills for being stupid and adding an unnecessary burden to the Canadian economy.
Is it just me that wonders how in an age of unlimited information, stupidity can travel faster than intelligence? What is it about the human brain that makes not just dimwits, but also otherwise smart people too, believe that every government leader can be absolutely corrupt and yet only a single whistleblower is brave enough to come forward? The news is filled with scandals all the time. Humans don’t know how to keep a secret, but somehow there are cabals filled with rich people who live lives surrounded by servants, who can keep global conspiracies a secret for decades.
Is it just me that wonders if the threat of terrorism is greater from within our borders than from outside? That anti-common sense, extreme nationalist, and hate groups pose more of a threat to our societies than fundamentalist religious wing-nuts? The internal threat of stupidity is greater than the external threat of tyranny.
Is it just me that is fed up with cliff jumping lemmings calling me a sheep? I feel like I’m calling out the morons the same way they call out people who actually care about things like actual research and scientific facts. I know that this little rant won’t change anyone’s ridiculous beliefs in conspiracy theories, and will do nothing more than convince these delusional idiots that I’m somehow lost, or blind to some fantasy land reality they live in. But I feel good getting this little rant off my chest, and I’ll work on more convincing arguments again after today.
Here is the thing… it feels good to rant sometimes, but is it just me that thinks dialogue is the only way forward? That we actually have to engage and try to convince people that their loony ideas are wrong? Am I the only one that thinks it’s not good enough to roll your eyes and let these people believe their baseless theories without providing counter arguments? The answer to the spread of bad ideas is to counter them with good ideas. It’s painful to engage, but if we don’t have dialogue, if we don’t provide counter arguments, then we really are sheep, or lemmings… Then we are allowing a small group of small minded people to influence and engage with more people likely to follow them down a path of poor thinking. Is it just me that thinks this?
