Welcome


Thank you for visiting our new forum! To start posting again please follow the link below to create a new password. First time forum users please follow the link to register. CFI thanks you for continuing the discussion on evidence-based thinking and humanist values.

If you believe all negative news about Trump is "fake…"


Forums Forums Politics and Social Issues If you believe all negative news about Trump is "fake…"

  • This topic has 265 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 6 months ago by TimB.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 266 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #304836
    Tee Bryan Peneguy
    Participant

    … show me how it’s being done.

    Since there seems to be a suprising amount of support for Trump here, and distrust for the mainstream media, maybe someone can help me understand this. (I have asked about this in a number of forums in the past 2 years but never gotten a satisfactory answer.)

    First: I’m well aware that there are sloppy, unethical and stupid journalists. As in any field, there are people who should not be there. I am also aware that media bias exists (and has always existed), and that certain individual media outlets that have pretty obvious agendas.

    What I don’t understand is the idea that “the mainstream media” is in the business of creating “fake news.” And by “fake,” I don’t mean biased, or spun, but fabricated, false narratives.

    If this is happening, then how is it happening, logistically?

    For the sake of argument, I will accept it as a “given” that the Washington Post, the New York Times, MSN, CNN, etc. etc. etc. are all lying about Trump.

    I’m simply asking how these elaborate, detailed narratives are being created.

    When I say I have never gotten a satisfactory answer, it’s been because people have provided examples of errors or bias (which isn’t “fake,”) or said, “MSN (or whichever) makes up something and they all go along like sheep.”

    I’ve already provided the “given” that they are lying. I want to know HOW:

    ✓ Tens of thousands of journalists, at thousands of competing outlets worldwide;

    ✓ the AP wire;

    ✓ present and past WH staff;

    ✓ elected officials across the nation;

    ✓ the FBI and our justice system;

    ✓ Pew, Barna and Gallup;

    ✓ old friends, business partners and employees of Donald Trump;

    ✓ dozens of random women;

    ✓ world leaders (including our allies);

    ✓ citizens in other developed nations;

    ✓ and the majority of economists, historians, political scientists, scientists of all stripes, physicians, patient advocacy groups, urban planners, climatologists, environmentalists, military strategy experts, educators, etc etc etc…

    … are collaborating in a massive stage show to destroy and discredit this President.

    How are different journalists inventing these stories simultaneously and updating them dozens of times each day?

    Are they interviewing sources that don’t exist? Fabricating transcripts? Falsifying video, audio, court documents on everything?

    How is it that no one has veered from the script?

    And who is WRITING the script? Because somebody has to be “in charge” of all this.

    Show me how this Rube Goldberg machine works.

    Take the question OUT of the realm of ideology or even Trump. Articulate this conspiracy, which makes the JFK Assassination look like a game of Candyland.

    #304850
    Player
    Blocked

    Who would you think the Washington Post, the New York Times, MSN, CNN would support?

    Trump or bernie as the two candidates???

    #304851
    Lausten
    Keymaster

    Player; There is one post in this thread. I know we go off on tangents regularly, but, try to stay on topic, for, I don’t know, the first page of the thread.

    #304852
    Tee Bryan Peneguy
    Participant

    Who would you think the Washington Post, the New York Times, MSN, CNN would support?

    Trump or bernie as the two candidates???

     

    ??? You must be responding to a different topic.

    #304853
    3point14rat
    Participant

    Take it easy on Player. He typed two(ish) lines of text, which is almost double his usual output. We can’t expect quality and quantity to both increase at the same time.

    The point of this thread is why I consider Trump supporters to be simply another flavour of conspiracy theorist or religious person- they have no evidence, just a feeling that they ‘know’ everything confirming what they already believe is true.

    It is interesting to hear what they think, but don’t expect to feel satisfied by any of the responses. If they had good reasons to believe, those reasons would have been long been plastered all over Fox and other right-wing “media” outlets. I fully expect deflection and a whole lot of ‘what-about-isms’ to be posted, but zero evidence (other than the idea that their lack of evidence is somehow evidence.)

    #304856
    Tee Bryan Peneguy
    Participant

    0

    The point of this thread is why I consider Trump supporters to be simply another flavour of conspiracy theorist or religious person

     

    Exactly. To further explain:

    If an idea is simply ludicrous, it should be evident regardless of your political ideology.

    For example: It’s impossible to overstate how much I detest Donald Trump. I’ve found him disgusting since the 1980s, and I fear he’s damaging the US beyond repair.

    Suppose I logged online and saw this news trending:

    Researchers conclude Trump responsible for JFK assassination, Jack the Ripper killings, Pompeii 

    (Wash. DC) — A panel of esteemed researchers from around the world have released a study showing conclusive proof that President Donald Trump has been personally responsible for every bad thing that’s ever happened.

    “We have DNA, fingerprints and video proving that President Donald Trump caused the 1929 stock market crash that led to the Great Depression, and that he invented the Black Plague virus that wiped out half of Europe in the Middle Ages,” said Scientist Dr. Joe Schmo. “And it turns out that in the 1st Century, he was known as Judas Iscariot.”

    Now as evil as I think Trump is, I would still recognize that this premise is simply impossible.

    It seems to me thar any Trump supporter with an IQ over 93 and the common sense of a tangerine could do the same about the idea that all media sources are lying and somehow in a conspiracy to destroy him.

     

     

    #304857
    3point14rat
    Participant

    “It seems to me that any Trump supporter with an IQ over 93 and the common sense of a tangerine could do the same about the idea that all media sources are lying and somehow in a conspiracy to destroy him.”

    I’m sure both of them do.

    #304859
    Tee Bryan Peneguy
    Participant

    I’m sure both of them do.

    You just made me snort…!

    But seriously, I know there are intelligent Trump supporters out there, who have been swept away by emotion and just haven’t thought this through… I hope, anyway

    #304861
    3point14rat
    Participant

    Yes, there are lots of intelligent Trump supporters out there. But that’s merely another similarity they have with conspiracy theorists and religious people.

    Many conspiracy theorists and religious people are much more intelligent than I am, but they have this giant hole in the area of their thinking that detects personal bias. Since it’s a human trait (I have it, but luckily my bias is correct), I don’t always blame the person, but after a while is does wear on me and I can get more emotionally invested in the discussion that I want or should.

    My group of friends is almost exclusively smart, hard-working, funny, honest, friendly people. They are also all religious and prone to believing right-wing conspiracies (nothing too hardcore, just things like: capitalists are all wonderful people who the left are trying to destroy, or Trudeau [I’m Canadian] only lies and his opponents only tell the truth.) As much as I like having challenging conversations and learning things, I hate political or religious topics with them because I’m vastly outnumbered, and thus it’s too easy for all of them to basically ignore anything I say and just back each other up with more and more bad arguments.

    This place is my refuge of sanity, because, although there are the obligatory trolls and fringe dwellers, there are also rational, thoughtful people who give me the dose of hope I need to not despair too much.

    #304862
    Lausten
    Keymaster

    So, if the underlying question is, are people that dumb? I think the answer is yes. But if you go around saying that, you’re not going to get very far in a conversation. I try to engage a PhD every now and then just to keep a check on myself. I was listening to a philosopher talk about moral realism recently and he used the word “habituated”. It’s not just an alternative for calling people dumb.

    We wouldn’t call someone who grew up on a plantation in New Orleans 200 years ago “dumb” for not knowing the latest philosophy and science on human intelligence and inheritance. They wouldn’t know about genetics at all because no one did. They would be habituated to thinking the condition of slavery was natural. If they tried to work against that reality, the system would crush them. Unless they got off that plantation and went to the best schooling available at the time, they wouldn’t have much incentive to question it.

    Many people today find themselves torn between their habituated culture and the world of information and ideas outside of it. This is not a left or right problem. Look to bees, GMOs and vaccines for the same phenomenon. Many of them deal with it by positing a system that they can’t access and can’t control and finding people who agree with them about that. They take comfort there rather than attempt to understand the real world.

    #304863
    3point14rat
    Participant

    “So, if the underlying question is, are people that dumb? I think the answer is yes.”

    Who’s habituated, who’s dumb, and how can you tell the difference?

    I give most people a free pass until I show them how they are wrong. Then if they keep being wrong on purpose, I label them ‘willfully ignorant’ (the ultimate insult in my opinion). Otherwise I see how and why they think the way they do and judge them based on that.

    On topics of morality where there’s a legitimate spectrum of beliefs, I don’t come down as hard, but when it comes to facts and/or logic, I have little patience.

    #304864
    Lausten
    Keymaster

    That can be a challenge, but you can’t get inside someone’s head, so I’ve become less interested in people’s motives lately. They might not even know them. There’s a TED talk about the reaction you described, if we disagree with someone our first reaction is to assume they are misinformed. That can be true, but once you are past that point, it gets a lot more difficult. The TED talk didn’t give an answer if I remember right.

    The other problem is, how do you educate 60 million people when there are powerful people trying to prevent you from doing that? I’m getting off topic and above my pay grade, but we have to live with people who don’t think like us until we figure that out. There’s a lot we can get done despite disagreement and I think if we focus on that stuff, we’ll figure out the rest.

    #304865
    3point14rat
    Participant

    My interest is very much with the motives behind beliefs. The reason someone believes something different than me is fascinating. It never ceases to amaze me how two people can have exactly the same factual information and come to literally opposite conclusions.

    Most people don’t have a clue why they believe something and don’t seem to care. That’s probably why telling them how and why they’re wrong falls on deaf ears.

    You’re right that educating millions on how to think is ultimately the issue, but the sheer volume of ignorance has a momentum that makes changing course veeeery slow. And those interested in keeping the ignorant ignorant have the advantage of all that ignorance to work with. Trump is a god-send to them.  It’s creepy seeing Trump accidentally do everything the ignorance-pushers want him to do and all his followers taking it in without question.

    Getting back on topic, maybe I’m completely wrong about Trump and some Trump followers come and show me why I should believe the negative reporting on Trump is fake.

    #304866
    Tee Bryan Peneguy
    Participant

    [So, if the underlying question is, are people that dumb? I think the answer is yes. But if you go around saying that, you’re not going to get very far in a conversation…

    We wouldn’t call someone who grew up on a plantation in New Orleans 200 years ago “dumb” for not knowing the latest philosophy and science on human intelligence and inheritance.]

    And maybe I’m just not posing my question correctly. Because to me, this seems to be more of a question about logic, and less about politics.

    My question is about logistics. Only logistics. I don’t ask anyone to prove to me that the media is “liberal” or that any particular report is wrong. I’m asking HOW such a giant conspiracy could operate … because thousands of writers can’t spontaneously invent all these events, scandals and claims that magically fit together. Not even with high-speed Internet. To be “fake news,” someone would have to be writing and directing it all.

    Going beyond logic: I realize most people don’t understand how newsrooms work, or what journalists are like.

    In general, journalists are competitive and backbiting. They herd like cats. They want to scoop other reporters and get their bylines on exclusive stories.

    If a competitor (or even a colleague) runs something false, they want to get credit for exposing it.

    And they really, really hate it when an editor or publisher demands a certain angle. I remember years ago watching a colleage and editor literally come close to blows over a change that was made to a bylined article to please an advertiser.

    So … yes, there is SOME corporate influence, and yes, publishers have agendas. But the idea that the corporate overlords just tell the writers what to say, or that all the journalists are collaborating on some giant work of fiction, is just ridiculous.

    #304867
    Tee Bryan Peneguy
    Participant

    Many conspiracy theorists and religious people are much more intelligent than I am, but they have this giant hole in the area of their thinking that detects personal bias.

    Actually, if you look into Qanon (Pizzagate, etc), it has LOT in common with the Satanic Panic of the 1980s  & 1990s. The lines of thought are very similar, and the same players, mainly Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christians, are central to both conspiracies.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 266 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.