Is cynicism over the belief that misinformation is everywhere more harmful than the misinformation itself? This argument was put forth Thursday in a Financial Times op-ed.

Media coverage of misinformation inflates our sense of how much misinformation exists, leading to the feeling that nothing is trustworthy and searching for truth is a useless exercise, Tim Harford argued.

A world in which everyone is lying to you is a world in which you can pick and choose whatever you want to believe and to reject. If you know the liars are out there, you’ll be careful; if you think the liars are everywhere, you might give up on the idea of truth altogether.

Pointing to a June 5 study published in Nature, Harford says that misinformation is not "all around us," but rather a problem mostly affecting a fringe.

Researchers constructed a list of nearly 500 “untrustworthy” websites operating in 2016, but of all the visits made to news sites by US citizens in 2016, this long list of dubious sources explains less than 6 per cent. Other researchers use different methods but reach similar conclusions: extremist content and deceptive news stories are not negligible, but represent a small slice of what people are watching and reading.

This is not to say that misinformation is not a problem. It certainly is a problem when a fringe group can be motivated to engage in violence.

On one hand, I think Harford is right to point out that we need to guard against cynicism. In most cases, the truth is knowable and worth fighting for.

On the other hand, I think Harford is severely downplaying how widespread misinformation has become. (This may be in part due to Harford writing from the UK.) For example, 30% of Americans, including 68% of Republicans, wrongly believe the 2020 presidential election was stolen, which has led to numerous deleterious effects to our political system. And just this week, a study released by the Annenberg Center found that an increasing number of Americans, 28%, falsely believe that the Covid vaccine killed thousands of people.

So, we must do both: 1) guard against cynicism, and 2) treat misinformation as a serious problem that requires effort to prevent the suffering it causes.

QAnon and the Election

With the approaching presidential election, we may witness a resurgence of QAnon content, thanks in part to Russia and former President Donald Trump.

According to Reuters, "Russian government-supported organizations are playing a small but increasing role amplifying conspiracy theories promoted by QAnon, raising concerns of interference in the November U.S. election."

One expert told Reuters that QAnon fits with Russia's efforts to present the U.S. as a nation falling apart. QAnon followers are also sharing more content from Russia. The Russian news site RT was the 12th most shared website among QAnon followers earlier this month, one report found.

Additionally, Trump shared a number of QAnon posts on Truth Social this past week, which included calls to imprison his political opponents and other notable figures, as well as a sexist attack on Democrat presidential candidate Vice President Kamala Harris. When one of the most famous people in the world amplifies QAnon content, we’re likely to see a surge in similar content.

What Else We're Reading

AP: “What to know after Texas authorities searched the homes of Latino campaign volunteers”

A series of raids in Texas on the homes of Latino campaign volunteers has outraged civil rights groups who want federal action after officers seized electronics and documents as part of a state investigation into alleged election fraud.

No charges have been filed against those who had their homes searched this month around San Antonio. The targets of the raids, including an 87-year-old campaign volunteer, and their supporters say they did nothing wrong and have called the searches an attempt to suppress Latino voters.

Read the rest.

Peter Wehner: “Trump’s Evangelical Supporters Just Lost Their Best Excuse”

The most common argument made by former President Donald Trump’s evangelical supporters in defense of their support is that although Trump may not be a moral exemplar, what matters most in electing a president is his policies. And for them, abortion is primus inter pares.

Trump is a great pro-life champion, they say, perhaps the greatest in history, and that is what most distinguishes him from the abortion extremism of Kamala Harris. On that basis alone, they insist, Trump, regardless of his faults and failures, deserves their votes.

I understand that line of argument, though I strongly disagree with it. The rationale was always weaker than Trump’s supporters were willing to admit, because Trump’s moral depravity was always far worse and more dangerous than they were willing to acknowledge. And his achievements fell far short of their hopes and claims to end abortion.

But the pro-life justification for supporting Trump has just collapsed. …

Gift link.

Share