Choose your reality: Trust wanes, conspiracy theories rise

[JustGeorge]

Something must be done about better regulating the internet, especially social media. Facebook has been the worst offender, in my opinion, with algorithms designed to elicit the attention of people according to the tracked views of each person.

The algorithms seem more harmful that any particular news in itself... it puts us in echo chambers, essentially. Sure, most of us here realize that's a problem and would seek out a more balanced way of looking at things, but I'm not sure RF members are a good representation of the majority population. THe majority of folks I know out there in the real world who investigate much outside of their FB feed.

I doubt that conspiracy theories actually "create" paranoia. I would think the paranoia was already there to begin with, caused by other sources.

Meh. This might be true sometimes, but not all the time. My husband was never a paranoid guy before he started getting into conspiracy theories maybe a decade ago, but after he got into them, he saw the Devil everywhere(figuratively speaking). He was so paranoid for a time it greatly affected his daily life and relationships, until he realized he couldn't on like that, and dropped any study of them. The paranoia fell away gradually, too.

I think the key thing is, as long as there is a relatively open and free exchange of ideas, then people can evaluate and make their choices in the marketplace of ideas. The accurate guidance would still be there.

I guess that's what astonishes me about all of this, since in the pre-internet days, choices in media and information were much fewer and far less accessible than they are now. Nowadays, people can find sources of information from all over the world; they don't have to rely on one source or another source or get stuck inside some echo chamber.

There is a problem, however. Sometimes, when wanting to get reliable information about news, events, or other factual data, it's not always that easy to find. I might see a questionable claim and want to verify it or at least find out where it might have come from. Oftentimes I hit paywalls. Information is a commodity in our society, and information costs money. Books cost money. A higher education costs money. Those who can't afford it will seek out news and information which is free of charge.

I think time is another factor. Time and money. If I have limited time to waste and a limited income, I'm not going to pay to read news from sources I have to hunt out, I'm going to go to a platform I already use and let people feed it to me for free in a timely manner. Not everyone has time to investigate something from 4 different angles.

 

[Stevicus]

It is a very recent phenomenon, because the term conspiracy is a very serious term. And is penally relevant because it is mentioned in penal codes.
Whose juridical definition is very simple: an action that aims at deceiving someone with the help of a third (that can be numerous people).
It is a very simple definition. It can be applied, basically to the great majority of crimes listed in the penal code.

In the very last decades the term has been ridiculed. Or rather, it has acquired a hilarious connotation with the purpose to ridicule the people who speak of them.

Personally, conspiracy theories never really bothered me. Some of them have been over the top and outlandish, while some have been rather interesting and intriguing. History contains many mysteries which may never be solved. If someone says "Maybe this is how it happened," I don't feel personally threatened by that. I can't imagine why anyone outside of government would be.

Moreover, I've never been a big fan of the way our government operates. I think our entire political system needs a massive overhaul and reform. As a result, if I notice people saying mean and nasty things about the government, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it or feel the need to rush to defend the honor of our government.

The government is big enough to defend itself, if it cares to do so. It doesn't need me or anyone else among the hoi polloi to run interference on their behalf.

 

[Estro Felino]

Personally, conspiracy theories never really bothered me. Some of them have been over the top and outlandish, while some have been rather interesting and intriguing. History contains many mysteries which may never be solved. If someone says "Maybe this is how it happened," I don't feel personally threatened by that. I can't imagine why anyone outside of government would be.

Moreover, I've never been a big fan of the way our government operates. I think our entire political system needs a massive overhaul and reform. As a result, if I notice people saying mean and nasty things about the government, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it or feel the need to rush to defend the honor of our government.

The government is big enough to defend itself, if it cares to do so. It doesn't need me or anyone else among the hoi polloi to run interference on their behalf.

I was reflecting upon that, indeed: transparency creates mutual trust.
In our daily routines, if we are transparent with the people we deal with, we are trusted.

The Government needs to be transparent too, to be trusted. Quid pro quo.

 

[sun rise]

I am not understanding: if these conspiracy theories are not true, what harm do they do?
...

January 6th.

 

[Estro Felino]

January 6th.

Since I am not an American, I don't know in detail the implications of that day. I know very little, actually.

What I can say, is that the trust between government and populace is very fragile, it is treading on very thin ice.
If someday the government of my country goes dictatorial, the populace and the army will be forced to assault the palaces.

 

[The Hammer]

I am not understanding: if these conspiracy theories are not true, what harm do they do?

Holding false or conspiratorial views is harmful because it eventually leads to one acting on false information typically to the detriment of themselves and others. Like the guy that decided to shoot up a pizza parlor, because they were trafficked children through it's basement. (The place had no basement to speak of).

 

[Polymath257]

The problem is that there *are* conspiracies in the real world. But they tend to be limited, involve as few people 'in the know' as possible, and have a very specific goal.

And yes, governments do try to undermine opponents and are in cahoots with the rich and powerful *everywhere*.

But to believe we didn't go to the moon, or that the Earth is flat, that evolution is a hoax, that the last US election was stolen, or that the evidence for some particular view is suppressed by a massive conspiracy is against pretty much all of human nature.

It is possible to keep a secret for a limited time if *very* few people know it. To expect millions of people to keep it over years is insane.

The danger is that fearful people act upon their beliefs, putting others in danger. The Pizzagate example is a good one as is January 6.

 

[Estro Felino]

Holding false or conspiratorial views is harmful because it eventually leads to one acting on false information typically to the detriment of themselves and others. Like the guy that decided to shoot up a pizza parlor, because they were trafficked children through it's basement. (The place had no basement to speak of).

I think that the problem here is the definition of conspiracy.

 

[The Hammer]

I think that the problem here is the definition of conspiracy.

Maybe? Imo a conspiracy is a belief that people have, but doesn't have reliable factual basis (until proven otherwise).

 

[Estro Felino]

Maybe? Imo a conspiracy is a belief that people have, but doesn't have reliable factual basis (until proven otherwise).

That is the definition of conjecture, I guess.
A conspiracy is for example, when a rich entrepreneurs bribes a politician to get a special permit, or privilege.

 

[The Hammer]

That is the definition of conjecture, I guess.
A conspiracy is for example, when a rich entrepreneurs bribes a politician to get a special permit, or privilege.

That's not a conspiracy, that's politics.

 

[sun rise]

Since I am not an American, I don't know in detail the implications of that day. I know very little, actually.

You asked what harm conspiracy theories can do. The attempted overthrow of the American system of government, January 6th, is the answer. Trump lost but some of those who could not accept it went all in on conspiracy theories.

 

[Truthseeker]

I am not understanding: if these conspiracy theories are not true, what harm do they do?

It is like I said on facebook: horses can fly.
Unicorns exist.
Is that harmful?

There are harmful conspiracies like the last election was stolen. Another problem is these algorthms could confirm to climate change deniers that climate change is not a problem. We are completely polarized and divided as a nation in the US because of these algorithms. Like the title of my thread suggests the algorithms confirm people's biases and conspiricies so they choose their own reality and don't look at the other side of any issue at all for many people.

 

[Truthseeker]

Censorship?
I guess that won't be very popular in the US. But as we've seen, popular rights aren't safe these days.
Reinstating the fairness doctrine?
That would be acknowledging that it was an error to dismiss it. It would also mess with the business model of very influential corporations like Fox News and OANN.

This thread is about social media, not cable news.

 

[Estro Felino]

There are harmful conspiracies like the last election was stolen. Another problem is these algorthms could confirm to climate change deniers that climate change is not a problem. We are completely polarized and divided as a nation in the US because of these algorithms. Like the title of my thread suggests the algorithms confirm people's biases and conspiricies so they choose their own reality and don't look at the other side of any issue at all for many people.

So the problem is polarization, I guess.

 

[Truthseeker]

Dear Estro Felino,

Conspiracy theories are conceptual (as in packaged) ideas about X institution/ group/ person - usually of influence or power - plotting and doing Y, with a questionable agenda towards Z groups in mind.

Widespread (believed by many, that is) conspiracy theories are dangerous because of what they make those who believe in them do.

Think of it this way: Conspiracy theories risk creating mass-paranoia and; a paranoid person is a danger to themselves and to others, regardless of whether what they are paranoid about is real or not.


Humbly
Hermit

Better response than I had to that comment.

 

[Truthseeker]

I think conspiracy theories begin whenever people notice that the reality around them doesn't agree with the propaganda and slogans they hear from their government and other influential entities in society.

For example, they might hear phrases like "liberty and justice for all" and believe it to be true, until they see someone's rights being violated by the police or some other institution or organization (and is able to get away with it). That's when some people might question whether the ideals propagated by the national leadership are actually true or whether someone might be lying. (This can be even further exacerbated if the government withholds key information or video evidence in questionable situations.)

Another example is they might hear in media or from government officials that "America is better off" or that "the economy is the best it's ever been" while seeing low paychecks, high prices, homeless on the streets, boarded-up businesses, at which point they'll think "What gives? Are the media and government lying?"

The lack of transparency, the Orwellian government culture of hyper-secrecy, and a long track record of malfeasance and corruption also contribute to public perceptions which may make them more susceptible to conspiracy theories. Those who seem troubled by the spread of conspiracy theories would do far better if they focused on and addressed these issues, rather than fret about social media or what those in the peanut gallery are whispering amongst themselves.

The approval rating of Trump hasn't budged at all during the 1/6 open commitee meetings, or during the Ukraine impeachment. That shows people aren't seeing what is really going on, or is interpreted for them in radical conspiritorial ways.

 

[Truthseeker]

I doubt that conspiracy theories actually "create" paranoia. I would think the paranoia was already there to begin with, caused by other sources.

There was a lack of trust to begin with, humans are prone to that, but it has been exasperated by the internet.

 

[Heyo]

This thread is about social media, not cable news.

I was talking about "social media". At least those media that have an editorial function. Facebook has "the algorithm" which chooses the posts you see first. As that is a selection of news, FB can be called a news agency and as such could fall under a fairness doctrine.

 

[Truthseeker]

I was talking about "social media". At least those media that have an editorial function. Facebook has "the algorithm" which chooses the posts you see first. As that is a selection of news, FB can be called a news agency and as such could fall under a fairness doctrine.

I'm ignorant about what the 'fairness doctrine" covers, I'll admit. When it was repealed though, there was no widespread social media like today, so does that doctrine really cover social media? Just asking. Does it solve the social media problem?