The Macquarie Dictionary recently declared ‘fake news’ the word of the decade. While the epidemic of fake news and conspiracy theories shows no signs of abating, the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communications has made a significant contribution to the fight.
History has demonstrated that when people are fearful, believe they are powerless and can’t cope with threatening events they very often resort to conspiracy theories to explain their situation.
Equally often they look for scapegoats who are believed to be at the heart of the conspiracies – in the Christian world Jews and heretics; in the Muslim world heretics and Christians; and in the plague-ridden medieval times sins and sinners. Today it might be anyone from environmentalists to the news media or any convenient political opponent or out group which can be demonised.
The George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communications (4C) has made three significant contributions to combating the dangerous epidemic – a handbook addressing conspiracy theories; a project to combat misinformation; and another handbook on debunking fake news.
University of Bristol professor Stephan Lewandowsky and Mason 4C professor John Cook have produced The Conspiracy Theory Handbook, which explains how people come to believe conspiracy theories and how and why they share them.
The Conspiracy Theory Handbook explains the different factors that contribute to people believing and sharing conspiracy theories. It then looks at different responses to conspiracy theories, such as inoculation, debunking, and empowering people.
Most usefully it outlines seven traits that characterise conspiratorial thinking, dubbing them with the acronym CONSPIR.
The first is the ability to simultaneously believe in mutually contradictory ideas. They cite as an example believing the theory that Princess Diana was murdered while also believing she faked her own death.
“This is because the theorists’ commitment to disbelieving the ‘official’ account is so absolute, it doesn’t bother them that the two are matter if their belief system is incoherent.”
Second, is an overriding suspicion that involves a nihilistic degree of skepticism towards official accounts. The suspicion closes the mind and insulates the believer from accepting anything that doesn’t fit their conspiracy theory.
Third, the conspirators motives are always dodgy although the authors term this nefarious saying:
“The motivations behind any presumed conspiracy are invariably assumed to be nefarious. Conspiracy theories never propose that the presumed conspirators have benign motivations.”
Fourth, whatever the truth of the matter something must be wrong.
“Although conspiracy theorists may occasionally abandon specific ideas when they become untenable, those revisions don’t change their overall conclusion that ‘something must be wrong’ and the official account is actually based on deception.”
Fifth, conspiracy theorists are also paranoid and the authors term the theorists ‘persecuted victims’ who see themselves as victims of organized persecution. Simultaneously “they see themselves as brave antagonists taking on the villainous conspirators.” This results in a self-perception of being both a victim and a hero.
Sixth, and perhaps unsurprisingly, the conspiracy theorist is immune to evidence – “inherently self-sealing where evidence that counters a theory is re-interpreted as originating from the conspiracy. This reflects the belief that the stronger the evidence against a conspiracy (eg the FBI exonerating a politician from allegations of misusing a personal email server), the more the conspirators must want people to believe their version of events (eg, the FBI was part of the conspiracy to protect that politician).” Indeed, the nature of conspiracy theories is that any evidence which disproves a theory may be interpreted as yet further evidence for the conspiracy.
Seventh nothing is random or happens by accident.
“The overriding suspicion found in conspiratorial thinking frequently results in the belief that nothing occurs by accident.
Small random events, such as intact windows in the Pentagon after the 9/11 attacks, are re-interpreted as being caused by the conspiracy (because if an airliner had hit the Pentagon, then all windows would have shattered) and are woven into a broader, interconnected pattern.”
Some years ago, the American Skeptics Society founder, Michael Shermer, visited Australia and gave a talk about 9/11 at the University of Melbourne. He joked that the conspiracy theory he was asked about most was whether 9/11 was an inside job planned by George W. Bush. When asked whether it was true or not he inevitably replied that if George W. had been the organiser it wouldn’t have worked.
The Handbook authors suggest that conspiracy theories spring from “feelings of powerlessness, exploiting highly unlikely events; social media; coping with threats; and, disputing mainstream politics.”
If you hate Hillary Clinton, for instance, it is a short step to believing that she runs a Satanic child sex abuse empire from the basement of a Washington DC pizza parlour and, in the case of one believer, you arm yourself heavily and head off to the pizza place to liberate the children. Then if you get arrested you believe it is all part of the cover-up.
Lewandowsky and Cook point out that genuine conspiracies do exist.
“Volkswagen conspired to cheat emissions tests for their diesel engines. The US National Security Agency secretly spied on civilian internet users. The tobacco industry deceived the public about the harmful health effects of smoking.
We know about these conspiracies through internal industry documents, government investigations, or whistleblowers … Conspiracy theories, by contrast, tend to persist for a long time even when there is no decisive evidence for them.”
David Michael’s new book The Triumph of Doubt is the latest investigation of this merchants of doubt phenomenon.
The authors also highlight tactical conspiracy theories that aren’t always the result of genuinely held false beliefs but are intentionally constructed or amplified for strategic, political reasons. The Russian government’s spread of various political conspiracy theories in the West, particularly during the 2016 Presidential election, is one example.
Climate change denial, for instance, is not irrational but is “an effective political strategy to delay climate action by undermining people’s perception of the strength of scientific evidence,” the Handbook says.
Noel Turnbull has had a 50-year-plus career in public relations, politics, journalism and academia. He blogs at http://noelturnbull.com/blog/
Comments
19 responses to “How to tackle the dangerous epidemic of fake news and conspiracy theories.”
Firstly, drop the term fake news. After forty years in journalism I am in no doubt that while standards are in the gutter today, they were not critically higher in the past. However, in the past a journalist chasing a story would be told to provide proof for claims, to strive for balance and to include a diversity of views.
What is called fake news today is not necessarily either fake or indeed news, but simply a different opinion, set of data, collection of facts which run counter to a generally held view which becomes a running narrative.
If something is fake it will not endure. It will in time be brought down. To seek to dismiss those who do not agree, whether highly qualified or without qualifications is in the interests of no-one. Good science and safe medicine both require questions and diversity of opinion across a broad spectrum. Indeed, neither can function optimally without it.
Take this claim: Climate change denial, for instance, is not irrational but is “an effective political strategy to delay climate action by undermining people’s perception of the strength of scientific evidence,” the Handbook says.
Firstly, while some people may deny climate change the majority do not. Many, including many highly qualified scientists question the validity of the running narrative on Climate Change and disagree as to its cause. Most people know the climate always changes so a ‘climate denier’ is an oxymoron. The term, like anti-vaxxer, has no critical substance in its own right but is merely used to label and dismiss those who challenge or question the running narrative.
And anyone asking questions of the running narrative on the climate change theory will soon find data indicating that ‘the science’ is itself flawed because the system silences questioners and only supports ‘the science’ which supports the running narrative.
For any student of history none of this is new. People, qualified and unqualified have been burned at literal stakes for challenging or questioning a running narrative or firmly held dogma. Today we only ‘burn’ them at metaphorical stakes but we destroy lives and careers in the process. And why? To seek to silence those who challenge one view is neither wise nor democratic.
Anyone who reads the histories of science as a system of enquiry and medicine, will know that the pages are littered with those condemned, mocked, dismissed, destroyed, because they dared to question a commonly held, but erroneous belief, entrenched at the time in the science-medical system. The story of Ignaz Semmelweiss is a sobering and tragic reminder of this reality. He made a link between hygiene and Puerperal Fever, which, in the early 19th century, once men had taken over medicine and childbirth, was killing women in huge numbers. He demanded doctors in his hospital wash their hands. They were outraged. They had always moved from dissecting cadavers to delivering babies and his demand was insane according to medical knowledge.
But, Semmelweiss did get hands washed and the mortality rate for new mothers plummeted. However, his enraged colleagues soon drove him out and returned to their filthy practices and watched without concern as the mortality rate for new mothers skyrocketed. Semmelweiss was right and was ultimately proven to be right and his science-medical colleagues were totally wrong. In his time he would have been called anti-science, anti-medicine and no doubt a denier!
Doubt and scepticism are the foundation of common sense and what was once called ‘street-smart.’ If we wish to dumb down society substantially, we seek to remove doubt and scepticism. Although, in that way of humans, generally the greater the force the greater the resistance and so the more some seek to destroy the questioners, the more questions will be asked. And rightly so.
I love to please people, and here is my own conspiracy theory for Turnbull to denigrate.
In 2001, 2004, 2007, and 1010, I surveyed a pre-identified demographic corridor through (then) Australia’s most churned population, the Sunshine Coast, and this was conducted door-to-door. One of the questions identified unemployment and this was found to be: 17%, 19%, 21% and 23%, respectively. I applied the definition of unemployment adopted universally since 1897, a consistency which all valid statistics must adhere to.
Yet in 2007, John Howard announced that unemployment was 3.4% and no politician of any persuasion disagreed. Howard also claimed we were then enjoying “an era of unprecedented prosperity”.
Was I challenged? Media economist Keene said I must be mistaken so I counter-challenged him to do his own quick survey in any working class suburb. He agreed, and I have heard nothing from him to this day.
My ‘conspiracy theory’ is the Murdoch media, SBS, and ABC, political parties, all universities and social scientists, the ACTU, and several major unions, all conspired to deceive the Australian people. Have fun denigrating me, Mr Turnbull.
The sad thing is that most peoples are not able to have independent and critical assessment of what are the fake news and conspiracy theories when the main stream media are being used as propaganda tools by hidden hands. Hands that have hidden agendas like war in Iraq etc. It can happen with all kind of regimes and governments. History is our lessons. How WWI, WWII and many other wars were instigated with fake news and conspiracy theories in old empires and dynasties alike in both East and West. The establishment of United Nations was the first step that gives us hope to set out proper international rules of laws to protect our true “human civilization” and “human rights”. We really cannot rely on US , UK, FRANCE regimes or Russia or China to safeguard the proper rules of international laws. We are all human. We can make mistakes. The only proven way of stopping human leaders of superpowers to again commit serious war crimes and other devastating disasters of waging war on another country is that we have powerful independent peace keeping and law enforcing forces which can stop them in time. Imagine, is that our “naive” dream? Food for thought!!
Once you might have been able to look at something that was said in the media on face value and ascertain whether it was true or false. Now you should look at what is behind that face as well to be sure if it is not something else . While you are there you might suddenly notice that what was a face with another side behind originally, is really a triangular shaped object with three faces. But then it may also be four faces. Any of these look the same from the first single faced-side.
On top of that, now we also have mirrors that reflect all of the faces so you can’t be sure whether it is the image or the reflection is real. Such are the layers of deception when humans act as predators on other humans. We don’t hunt animals much anymore for food, we hunt other human beings for profits and power.
The thing is most nights I can listen to the BBC on our ABCNewsRadio spout conspiracies against its chosen enemies that will in turn be repeated by ABC journalists during the day. I have no doubt there is/are production units at the BBC devoted specifically to fake news – perception management or if you prefer – war propaganda or to be blunt conspiracy theories – specifically directed against Russia and China but also at times against Iran or Syria or who ever is the enemy of the day.
Its as if the US supplies the UK with its nuclear delivery systems and missiles and in return the UK uses its ‘good offices’ to campaign against presumed enemies of the USofA. And as junior partner the ABC is a willing accomplice.
Interesting to read this article and the many negative reaction (in comments) to it. It seems we often distrust the “official narrative”, and some of this distrust takes the form of “conspiracy theories”. After all, we do have concrete examples where the official narrative becomes discredited later on. On the other hand, not all official narrative is wrong.
This is a difficult issue, and I don’t feel I have a good solution other than to keep an open mind, think independently, learn continuously, look at the world objectively and impartially. And acknowledge that: (i) people can reasonably have different views about a matter; while (ii) not falling into the trap that we cannot identify arguments that are manifestly wrong.
what a sad little article this is. I’m a surprised you would even run it here at all.
Agree that we are at a point of overload on white Christian nationalist tactical or strategic political PR and communications which have forms of conspiracy theories as central for content to deflect, raise doubts and confuse voters, with legacy media central in controlling, transmitting and reinforcing the correct message e.g. need for low taxes, low costs and low prices.
From The ByLine Times UK (10/3/21) ‘Incarcerated by Myths‘ Sam Bright:
‘they print a version of the truth – their carefully-calibrated version of the truth – that serves their own political and financial ends. For one, the major right-wing newspapers are owned by rich patrons with a clear and obvious stake in ensuring the ascendancy of low-tax, right-wing politics. CJ Werleman (of ByLine) has extensively catalogued Rupert Murdoch’s corrupting influence in Australia, for example.’
Not simply about the US developed buffet of issues presented and/or promoting nationalism, conservative Christianity and conspiracy theories; but all are strategic to form opinions then voter coalitions to (quietly) allow radical right libertarian socioeconomic policies to pass.
The conspiracy theories round and denialism of ‘science’ grew with more understanding of climate science and global warming, the same architecture also promoted scepticism round Covid19 science and measures; allows key businesses to avoid constraints on their income. Main architects and supporters came from fossil fuels and related (nowadays orbiting round Koch think tanks) in the US, UK and Australia to delay any environmental and carbon emissions constraints on fossil fuels and related; even Brexit followed similar modus operandi with many attacks on ‘experts’…..
This certainly reads like something someone in the magic dust field of public relations would write.
Did some memo get sent out recently to the useful idiots of the establishment or something? Cos you’re all bleating to the same rulebook. Lumping those who claim “it’s the Muslims” in together with those who are pointing out the structural horrors of the system we are collapsing within is particularly slimy.
I remember reading a tweet recently before I once again quit the cesspool where an American teacher said she was unable to teach her students much about the ongoing, relentless horrors perpetrated by the CIA because her students simply couldn’t believe it, and that she couldn’t make the chunks small enough for her students to chew and digest.
I almost yearn for those simple days where, cloistered inside the soothing framing of the ABC and The Guardian, I could believe I was receiving the totality of all I needed to know and not once be given a glimpse of what lies beyond the press releases of Washington.
The divide is so stark now. I look at all you comfy types who are playing the billionaires game for them, joining in with their strident calls for more censorship, just so you all can keep feeling comfortable for a bit longer believing that we’re living inside something that died decades ago while tarring all those protesting against it and pointing out its shape as the same giant slab of deplorables. Yes, I hate Hillary Clinton too. Not because she’s a Satanist drinking blood but because of the Libyan men, women and children’s dead bodies whose blood runs off her hands.
Well put.
Fake news is actually two words. The rest of the article went unread after that great opening!
The quality of those supporting the weft of lies is declining… hope you got paid in cash!
Is it false that Japan has plutonium enough for 5,000 warheads? Please NOEL TURNBULL, tell me what to believe …
Deception involves ignoring those who oppose it, as decrying the truth invites comparison.
More subtlety!
I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that terms such as fake news/disinformation/misinformation/conspiracy theory are used primarily to marginalise opinions that run counter to the “official narrative.”
Which is ironic because so much of the fake news/disinformation/misinformation in the world today emanates from those who decide what the “official narrative” is, i.e. media corporations, intelligence agencies and governments. The aim appears to be to marginalise dissent.
A large part of this strategy involves ignoring stories (the power of leaving out) which would undermine the official narrative. Some concrete examples of stories that have received virtually no coverage in the Western and Australian media as they would undermine the official narrative:
– the Integrity Initiative and Institute for Statecraft
– the doctoring of the OPCW report into the alleged chemical weapon attack in Douma 2018 (several articles at P&I have covered this in depth).
– the UK Government’s propaganda campaign against Syria with a document dump from Anonymous
– and most recently another UK Government document dump on its expensive and extensive propaganda campaign against Russia, which provides documentary evidence that the BBC, Reuters and Bellingcat are agents of British propaganda
Irish journalist Bryan MacDonald in trawling through the latest Anonymous dump of UK Government documents found this statement:
“Another barrier to combating disinformation is the fact that certain Kremlin-backed narratives are factually true…. Responding to inconvenient truths, as opposed to pure propaganda, is naturally more problematic.”
Says it all really.
I strongly believe that the CIA and MI6 are in cahoots with Big Tech (Google, Facebook, etc) to control the ‘truth’ for the world to consume. Clever algorithms are being used to massively reduce the visibility of people and websites advocating peace and anti-war ideas in America. YouTube Channels of people in Hong Kong and other parts of Asia that are China-friendly are de-monetised, and their subscriptions mysteriously undone.
In Taiwan, during the Presidential elections of 2020, most Facebook (FB is huge in Taiwan) pages supporting the China-friendly Kuomintang candidate were busted. The office of the American ’embassy’ in Taipei is one of the largest in the world. They get to do the same work that they used to do in Hong Kong until the National Security Legislation was passed in 2020.
And of course, Russiagate never produced any real evidence apart from 16 American intelligence agencies agreeing and asserting that it was the Russians!
These days, you will get closer to the truth if you watch a bit of RT, and CGTN! CGTN is learning from RT; one way is to overcome disbelief by Western audiences is to interview Western professionals who have credibility. The same truth tellers who are being avoided by the Western MSM!
I think the CIA’s invisible face is also behind an increasing number of NGOs too. It’s great cover, and if anyone gets caught they say that it is unfair to target a worker in the particular organisation or human rights abuse. This from what I have seen, is what is behind some arrests in China where CIA agents are intermittently intercepted.
The American professors, just like the conspiracy theorists they criticise, appear to have made up their minds that views they themselves oppose are wrong and delusory. The fact that several reports have not satisfied close observers about what happened on 9/11, or in Syria, or in Salisbury, leads such people to wonder if those in authority are misleading us, as they did over WMD in Iraq. It’s no surprise that some are now suspicious about the pandemic and climate change as well, and even the moon and Mars landings: this is a predictable result of governments’ long record of lies. Putting forward a theory about a conspiracy doesn’t mean there wasn’t one. The question is who the conspirators are.
There is an interesting article at Offguardian.com on the subject of Conspiracy Denial and the personality types who fall into it. Those who obstinately cling to whatever the “Official Account” may be (usually a majority in any society) are often emotionally immature and fearful, as closed to any contradictory evidence as those whom they accuse of being paranoid conspiracy theorists . One of the things they often do these days when unable to explain why people might disbelieve them is to blame everything on the influence of nefarious outsiders (the Russians usually). Precious bodily fluids etc… In an all-encompassing information war, manipulation is everywhere, but the safest course for any ordinary person is to be most wary of those who have the greatest power to manipulate, i.e. those who control the mainstream news media. There is such a thing as fake news (including its obverse, the suppression of real information) and that is where you will find the source of it in most cases.
Well said