| Author
|
Post |
 
|
|
Marko Rollo
F L I N T O I D
|
A new study confirms what liberals have always suspected: rebuttals to conservative lies, no matter how factual, makes conservatives cling to the lies even harder. In essence, schooling conservatives is useless. Here's the
Washington Post article
.
Too funny. |
|
|
Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:00 pm |
|
|
Kevin McKague
F L I N T O I D
|
There was a
very interesting interview a few months back on the NPR show "On the Media"
about psychological experiments showing how people exposed to false information repeatedly tend to remember the items as true. This tends to happen even if, at the time they first received the info, they were told the info was false.
quote:
BOB GARFIELD: Now, if I understand your piece, when people hear a statement involving a negative - let's say Saddam was not connected to 9/11 - and they hear it often enough, somehow the "not" disappears.
SHANKAR VEDANTAM: That's right. What happens, unfortunately, is our denial of the myth ends up repeating the myth and makes the myth itself more accessible to people's memory. And furthermore, as the separate study that you note points out, what happens very often is that the "not" in the sentence essentially falls off with time in many people's memories.
BROOKE GLADSTONE: I want to ask you, then, about truth-squadding, since we're in the midst of political races. Here's the scenario: politician A makes horrendous charges against politician B, essentially lying about the opposition. A vigilant reporter notices this and does a truth-squadding article in the newspaper that says, no, this campaign ad is simply not true for the following reason. And politician B, of course, immediately starts attacking politician A for misrepresenting his or her record. Who wins?
SHANKAR VEDANTAM: I think invariably it's going to be politician A. When you have people who are systematically trying to manipulate you, spread propaganda, for instance, and they repeat the same information over and over again, the fact that we are not very good at remembering where we heard a particular piece of information, we tend to believe that we have heard the information from multiple independent sources and therefore it must be true, rather than from the same untrustworthy source over and over again.
I recently had an interesting phone conversation with Tony Dearing, the editor of the Flint Journal. He was nice enough to call me after I had sent him an e-mail complaining that he had printed
a letter
stating that if elected, Barack Obama was elected, he would impose a fundamentalist Muslim state in which musicians and anybody who drank Coca-Cola would be executed. The letter, of course, is utter nonsense, and I told Mr. Dearing that although I think papers should give wide leeway in publishing opinions, they should draw a clear line by not publishing slander.
He said that he would publish the many letters complaining about this bit of FJ approved slander, but I cited this study and suggested that he shouldn't.
By publishing the letter in the first place, he dignified the lies by printing what normally only gets space on the web and in e-mails, and put it in print. By putting the lie in a newspaper, he elevated the lie in some of his readers' minds. Printing several letters saying something to the effect of "....of course Barack Obama
isn't
going to install a fundamentalist Muslim state and kill musicians and Coca-Cola drinkers, those people are likely to walk away from the paper with the two words "Obama" and "Muslim" stuck in their heads. The deed was done, and the Flint Journal is now responsible for the lie.
He said that he was wrong to print the letter, and that he saw that he had made a mistake. I told him that the best way to make up for the fact was to publish a statement signed by himself explaining his error.
I'm hoping he does that. |
|
|
|
Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:28 pm |
|
|
andi03
F L I N T O I D
|
****about psychological experiments showing how people exposed to false information repeatedly tend to remember the items as true. This tends to happen even if, at the time they first received the info, they were told the info was false.*****
Kevin....it's called brainwashing.  |
_________________
Build a bridge and get over it! |
|
|
Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:32 pm |
|
|
Marko Rollo
F L I N T O I D
|
I take that back. It isn't funny.
After re-reading my post hours later, it occurred to me that my point really wasn't to promote understanding or any deeper insight into the gap between camps, but was to be snarky.
If you're a conservative, I apologize.
My frustration is that I can see both sides of the argument, I can even argue both sides of the argument, but I can't find a common ground we can all agree on as a starting-off point from which to fashion a better set of policies for our community or our country. I'm just not smart enough.
It isn't that we're all different. All of us want a good partner, a safe home, maybe a couple of kids, decent health, and a belief that with a little bit of effort our lives will be better tomorrow than they were yesterday.
I started thinking about this after watching a
video at TED.
Jon Haidt argues that while we all have the same moral values, how we prioritize those values accounts for who we are. If you're smarter than me, don't bother watching. However, if you're as frustrated as I am, it gives a glimpse as to how we can come together for the common good. |
|
|
|
Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:54 pm |
|
|
twotap
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Kevin....it's called brainwashing.
You dont perchance watch the view or Oprah do you??  |
_________________
"If you like your current healthcare you can keep it, Period"!!
Barack Hussein Obama--- multiple times. |
|
|
Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:03 pm |
|
|
andi03
F L I N T O I D
|
| Nope, my wonderful television time is spent listening to the insane laugh of the Spongebob Squarepants show....argh!! Nope don't watch that much television anymore. |
_________________
Build a bridge and get over it! |
|
|
Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:15 pm |
|
|
Adam
F L I N T O I D
|
quote:
Marko Rollo schreef:
I take that back. It isn't funny.
After re-reading my post hours later, it occurred to me that my point really wasn't to promote understanding or any deeper insight into the gap between camps, but was to be snarky.
If you're a conservative, I apologize.
My frustration is that I can see both sides of the argument, I can even argue both sides of the argument, but I can't find a common ground we can all agree on as a starting-off point from which to fashion a better set of policies for our community or our country. I'm just not smart enough.
It isn't that we're all different. All of us want a good partner, a safe home, maybe a couple of kids, decent health, and a belief that with a little bit of effort our lives will be better tomorrow than they were yesterday.
Don't worry Kevin there's a website out there where liberals and neocons can come together. http://www.cfr.org/ Though Obama Clinton McCain and Bush Cheney may seem to have their differences they are all supporters of the CFR. |
|
|
|
Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:18 pm |
|
|
Marko Rollo
F L I N T O I D
|
Ah, Adam. Rolling through Flinttalk like a octogenarian with his turn signal stuck on. Thanks for the humor. For a moment, I was too serious.
quote:
Adam schreef:
Don't worry Kevin there's a website out there where liberals and neocons can come together. http://www.cfr.org/ Though Obama Clinton McCain and Bush Cheney may seem to have their differences they are all supporters of the CFR.
|
|
|
|
Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:26 pm |
|
|
Adam Ford
F L I N T O I D
|
|
|
Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:39 am |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Open chat
