I know that it's tempting to blame what happened on Tuesday night — the re-election of a former game-show host and inveterate liar with 34 felony counts and two impeachments as president of the United States — on social media in one form or another.
I research developmental psychology (aka leadership development, ego development, vertical development) and your point about “misinformation only works if there is an existing belief or tendency to play off, which means that it doesn't create beliefs so much as confirm them” is correct from my perspective. So it’s not about changing people’s minds but about reinforcing their existing perspectives, beliefs, and worldview.
But here’s the core thing that I think needs to be asked. If a political candidate in one of their rally speeches spreads misinformation and disinformation, and that then gets shared on social media, is that fake news?
Of course not, they actually said it in their speech.
But here’s the thing. What they said is still misinformation and disinformation. And it will still sway voters based upon their existing beliefs as you said.
This to me is the greatest issue of our day. We have leaders who both completely misunderstand the complex world we are moving into (often due to technology becoming so complex that it acts unpredictably like ecosystems in nature) and, at the same time, leaders who completely understand how to psychologically manipulate people because of people’s limiting beliefs and base psychological needs.
In fact, what’s even more alarming is how psychological manipulation of people has become so rampant in our society today that it’s effectively become normal (ie politics, business, etc), with many people completely unaware they are under the influence of it because it manipulates their beliefs and addictively makes them feels popular and strong. Gambling, video games, fashion / cosmetic industry, and the advertisement industry in general are good examples of this.
But I do think social media platforms do reinforce these bubbles of belief and these psychological addictions…depending upon how you use it though. Dave Gray has a website called Liminal Thinking that has a video him explaining how these bubbles of beliefs reinforce our beliefs, so much so that they intentionally limit our understanding of reality so that we often misinterpret it and misunderstand it.
Yet in our rapidly changing, complex world today, we need people who are capable of stepping beyond their limiting beliefs and worldviews, so they can actually understand the present reality clearly which then allows them to tackle these complex problems with a true understanding of them, rather than just with a delusional belief that they’re a “simple fix”, as some politicians would have you believe.
Great article Matthew. I too once thought people were just dumb and/or naive in believing the things the internet serves up to them on that silver algorithmic platter. One thing not addressed here is this: perhaps the larger contributor to Trump winning this election is because his voters "are" him. It's become clear to me that we are no longer a kind and decent people. I started to have these thoughts after Sandy Hook. I thought for sure that tragedy would bring out our greater good and finally make headways on gun control but nope - after everyone giving their meaningless statements on "thoughts and prayers", the next words uttered was "stay the hell away from my guns". My point is this: America is no longer a "shining city on a hill" as Ronald Reagan so eloquently said so many years ago. I used to believe that. Not anymore. I understand the pessimism of this view and I apologize for piling on to this already bleak scenario. Its just hard to see there being an alternative explanation in how this man received 72 million votes.
I was struck canvassing among truly undecided voters how *poor* their information was—their sense of issues was amorphous, confabulated, often incoherent. They were not all uneducated. Couldn’t help but blame the internet—not just social media but the volume of low-quality, undocumented opinion moving through private groups, podcasts, etc.; the diminution of vetted sources. Seems to me the challenge is to create not just revenue models but audience for sources of info with standards of verification, which includes thinking about education. I talk about bookstores & libraries because they sit where people are and advocate implicitly for a broad idea of learning, not just a position. How can we enrich people’s daily information environment? How can we elevate the standards for conferring trust?
I research developmental psychology (aka leadership development, ego development, vertical development) and your point about “misinformation only works if there is an existing belief or tendency to play off, which means that it doesn't create beliefs so much as confirm them” is correct from my perspective. So it’s not about changing people’s minds but about reinforcing their existing perspectives, beliefs, and worldview.
But here’s the core thing that I think needs to be asked. If a political candidate in one of their rally speeches spreads misinformation and disinformation, and that then gets shared on social media, is that fake news?
Of course not, they actually said it in their speech.
But here’s the thing. What they said is still misinformation and disinformation. And it will still sway voters based upon their existing beliefs as you said.
This to me is the greatest issue of our day. We have leaders who both completely misunderstand the complex world we are moving into (often due to technology becoming so complex that it acts unpredictably like ecosystems in nature) and, at the same time, leaders who completely understand how to psychologically manipulate people because of people’s limiting beliefs and base psychological needs.
In fact, what’s even more alarming is how psychological manipulation of people has become so rampant in our society today that it’s effectively become normal (ie politics, business, etc), with many people completely unaware they are under the influence of it because it manipulates their beliefs and addictively makes them feels popular and strong. Gambling, video games, fashion / cosmetic industry, and the advertisement industry in general are good examples of this.
But I do think social media platforms do reinforce these bubbles of belief and these psychological addictions…depending upon how you use it though. Dave Gray has a website called Liminal Thinking that has a video him explaining how these bubbles of beliefs reinforce our beliefs, so much so that they intentionally limit our understanding of reality so that we often misinterpret it and misunderstand it.
Yet in our rapidly changing, complex world today, we need people who are capable of stepping beyond their limiting beliefs and worldviews, so they can actually understand the present reality clearly which then allows them to tackle these complex problems with a true understanding of them, rather than just with a delusional belief that they’re a “simple fix”, as some politicians would have you believe.
Great article Matthew. I too once thought people were just dumb and/or naive in believing the things the internet serves up to them on that silver algorithmic platter. One thing not addressed here is this: perhaps the larger contributor to Trump winning this election is because his voters "are" him. It's become clear to me that we are no longer a kind and decent people. I started to have these thoughts after Sandy Hook. I thought for sure that tragedy would bring out our greater good and finally make headways on gun control but nope - after everyone giving their meaningless statements on "thoughts and prayers", the next words uttered was "stay the hell away from my guns". My point is this: America is no longer a "shining city on a hill" as Ronald Reagan so eloquently said so many years ago. I used to believe that. Not anymore. I understand the pessimism of this view and I apologize for piling on to this already bleak scenario. Its just hard to see there being an alternative explanation in how this man received 72 million votes.
I was struck canvassing among truly undecided voters how *poor* their information was—their sense of issues was amorphous, confabulated, often incoherent. They were not all uneducated. Couldn’t help but blame the internet—not just social media but the volume of low-quality, undocumented opinion moving through private groups, podcasts, etc.; the diminution of vetted sources. Seems to me the challenge is to create not just revenue models but audience for sources of info with standards of verification, which includes thinking about education. I talk about bookstores & libraries because they sit where people are and advocate implicitly for a broad idea of learning, not just a position. How can we enrich people’s daily information environment? How can we elevate the standards for conferring trust?
Great question Ann
Wow, never a look in the mirror... That is why the democratic party fails... They talk down to the citizens and try to control through fear...