4 ms·

Really? It took a huge mobilization of media manipulation fear mongering and gas lighting to get the American public to swallow the Weapons of Mass Destruction

Really? It took a huge mobilization of media manipulation fear mongering and gas lighting to get the American public to swallow the Weapons of Mass Destruction and/or Saddam did 9/11 lies. If people had been free to speak their minds (https://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/21/phil_donahue_on_his_2003_firing https://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/21/phil_donahue_on_his_2...) back then we wouldn't have been lead into that war like lemmings. Information is control. I trust the funny cat lady next door to not start a war with Iran more than I trust anyone on an editorial board of an American newspaper not to. Lies require censorship of truth to survive. EDIT: added a reference. Keep in mind for every anti-war journalist fired for standing up to the official lies there were easily 100 who kept their heads down. Im not scared of flat earth lies. I'm scared of Iraq war or even worse, World War I levels of deception.

kibwen 6y ago
> If people had been free to speak their minds back then What? > Lies require censorship of truth to survive. This is naive. People willfully believe lies if they support their worldview, even in the presence of truth.
JoshTriplett 6y ago
> If people had been free to speak their minds back then Are you under the impression that people weren't free to speak their minds "back then"? People did speak their minds, loudly and regularly. That didn't change the outcome.
- fatbird 6y ago
  Yes: there were marches of millions of people in all the major cities of the Western hemisphere against what were readily understood to be the lies of the Bush Administration rushing to war. Didn't matter. The invasion of Iraq happened, and millions stood dumbfounded, unable to understand how they could have failed when they clearly got their message out.
Spivak 6y ago
Other ways lies survive. * By being easily digestible and easy to state while the the refutation requires a long form explanation. * By spreading faster and being repeated more often than the truth preying on our innate bias toward things we’ve heard before. * By being tied to an unrelated political ideology or issue of intellectual or moral superiority. * By gaslighting where the authority of truth tellers are undermined. * As a form of the Streisand effect where any attempt to discredit or silence lie tellers is parlayed into more evidence for its truth. * When the belief in the truth imparts a material, social, or image cost to the would-be believer.
- spion 6y ago
  Its not just lies either, its honest mistakes that are novel and/or cause emotional reactions. The retweet button is a mistake amplifier https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1146 https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1146 People need to become aware just how bad most social media content that reaches them is.
aaron-santos 6y ago
> Lies require censorship of truth to survive. No they don't. Lies spread faster than truth[1] and repetition legitimizes[2]. The marketplace of ideas is the just world fallacy for people who like to think a lot. [1] https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1114.8.full https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1114.8.full [2] https://www.spring.org.uk/2010/12/the-illusion-of-truth.php https://www.spring.org.uk/2010/12/the-illusion-of-truth.php

kibwen 6y ago

> If people had been free to speak their minds back then What? > Lies require censorship of truth to survive. This is naive. People willfully believe lies if they support their worldview, even in the presence of truth.

JoshTriplett 6y ago

> If people had been free to speak their minds back then Are you under the impression that people weren't free to speak their minds "back then"? People did speak their minds, loudly and regularly. That didn't change the outcome.

fatbird 6y ago
Yes: there were marches of millions of people in all the major cities of the Western hemisphere against what were readily understood to be the lies of the Bush Administration rushing to war. Didn't matter. The invasion of Iraq happened, and millions stood dumbfounded, unable to understand how they could have failed when they clearly got their message out.

Spivak 6y ago

Other ways lies survive. * By being easily digestible and easy to state while the the refutation requires a long form explanation. * By spreading faster and being repeated more often than the truth preying on our innate bias toward things we’ve heard before. * By being tied to an unrelated political ideology or issue of intellectual or moral superiority. * By gaslighting where the authority of truth tellers are undermined. * As a form of the Streisand effect where any attempt to discredit or silence lie tellers is parlayed into more evidence for its truth. * When the belief in the truth imparts a material, social, or image cost to the would-be believer.

spion 6y ago
Its not just lies either, its honest mistakes that are novel and/or cause emotional reactions. The retweet button is a mistake amplifier https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1146 https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1146 People need to become aware just how bad most social media content that reaches them is.

aaron-santos 6y ago

> Lies require censorship of truth to survive. No they don't. Lies spread faster than truth[1] and repetition legitimizes[2]. The marketplace of ideas is the just world fallacy for people who like to think a lot. [1] https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1114.8.full https://science.sciencemag.org/content/359/6380/1114.8.full [2] https://www.spring.org.uk/2010/12/the-illusion-of-truth.php https://www.spring.org.uk/2010/12/the-illusion-of-truth.php