Tuesday, August 1, 2017

Most News Stories and Political Speeches are Crafted to Misinform and Manipulate You


Problems can be identified and solutions found without experiencing anger, fear, and hate. But we are programmed by the media and politicians to react with those emotions every time we think of the other political party or hear their views expressed. It is a major cause of political polarization in the US.
Contents

Introduction
Those of us who follow the news on TV, radio, newspapers or the internet are bombarded by so many unreliable sources of information if we don't make a concerted effort to pay attention to whether the information is reliable or not, we are very likely to be misinformed and manipulated by journalists, politicians, and political organizations who are taking advantage of us to advance their own personal agenda. The vast majority of what is considered "news" is crafted to get your attention, influence your opinion, make you react the way they want, and keep you coming back for more. Accuracy is of secondary importance. The news rarely gives you an accurate objective representation of reality. We are programmed by the media to react with anger every time we think of the other party or hear their views expressed. It is a major cause of political polarization in the US. Politicians and journalists will not help solve this problem. They are the main beneficiaries of polarization and the main causers of it. This post should help you understand why and how the news media misinforms and manipulates you. With that knowledge you will be able to see through the illusions spun by media manipulators.
A good introduction to this subject is the article at Cracked.com 5 Ways To Stay Sane In An Era Of Non-Stop Outrage which discusses media techniques used to manipulate the public. In the article, the author David Wong, discusses President Trump's media strategy. The principles Wong outlines are generally applicable so it is worth looking at the article even if you don't share the author's political views.
Here is a brief excerpt along with the section titles to give you an idea of what the article is about:

Hey, you know what happens when you read something really enraging on the internet? You get a hit of dopamine. And even though it's a "bad" feeling, you immediately want to feel it again, because anything is better than being bored. Well, people who know how to manipulate this mechanism rule the world. Here's what you need to know now:
...
Ignore Headlines Telling You To Feel An Emotion
...
Remember That People Literally Get Paid To Upset You
...
Know That If You Can Be Trolled, You Can Be Controlled
...
Understand The "Firehose Of Falsehoods"
...
You Must Separate The Signal From The Noise
Dopamine is a chemical found in the brain that plays a role in addiction (see below). Journalists want to get people addicted to the news because journalists make more money that way.
Firehose of Falsehoods referrs to a modern propaganda technique (see below).

Back to Contents

Trolling and Provocateurs
The term "Trolled" is used by Wong to mean that there are people who are deliberately outrageously provocative. They are not really trying to convince anyone of their way of thinking. They are trying to provoke people to react in a way creates publicity (or has some other effect) that helps the provocateur make money or accomplish their aims. They are controlling people (manipulating people) by provoking a reaction from them.
For example, Milo Yiannopoulos, a British public speaker and writer, often makes provocative statements. Recently, at the University of California at Berkeley, protesters demonstrating against Milo rioted and the ensuing publicity increased sales of his books. Some people who might not otherwise be sympathetic to Milo became sympathetic to him because of their outrage at the violence. Those rioters didn't understand they were being manipulated by Milo into helping him sell books and gain supporters.
During the last presidential election campaign, Donald Trump made many provocative statements which attracted so much attention they nearly obliterated the other primary candidates from coverage in the news media. This publicity advantage helped him win the Republican nomination even though his statements were offensive to many people. The outraged reaction of many Democratic party supporters delighted some Republicans and moved them to support Trump. Trump's nomination stunned establishment Democrats and Republicans because they were not aware of how trolling and manipulation works.
Be wary of provocateurs on both sides. They are not telling you about anything real. The "ideology" they espouse is not a real threat because it is invented and inflated to promote themselves. Nobody, including themselves and their "supporters" really believe what they are saying. Many Democratic supporters were stunned and frightened when Trump won the general election. Many of Trump's supporters thought this reaction was humorous because they never took Trump's rhetoric literally.

The press takes him literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.
-Taking Trump Seriously, Not Literally by Salena Zito, theltlantic.com.
The provocateurs are trying to upset you, to distort your view of reality for their own personal gain. Don't fall for it.
And the news media is a willing and deliberate accomplice, sensationalizing news, spreading rumors, giving the provocateurs lots of publicity because the journalists capitalize on the public's addiction to outrage by turning it into an addiction to news that they can personally profit from.
Many politicians are also ready to jump on the bandwagon, taking the side that will get them the most votes, and benefiting from publicity. Many politicians perform for the voters in whatever way they think will get them the most votes. Unfortunately this too often involves playing on the voter's emotions by demonizing people with different political views. This increases polarization and is tearing our society apart. A true leader would explain why the policies he espouses are for the best without denying that the other side can have legitimate concerns because of their different circumstances and situations.

Back to Contents

Psychological Tricks
Be aware of these tricks used by journalists and politicians to manipulate you and keep you hooked on the news.

  • Be suspicious of headlines that stir up emotions.
  • But also notice how an entire story can be crafted to produce emotional reactions.
  • Be suspicious of rumors presented as news, and news stories based on unnamed sources. That unnamed CIA official might not exist or might be a retired administrative assistant who has no qualifications to make their opinion newsworthy.
  • The other side is not necessarily evil or stupid. Partisan journalists and commentators often to stir up hate by demonizing people on the other side.
  • A subtle but common method of demonization involves describing extremists as members of a group. For example, associating anarchists with Democrats or white supremacists with Republicans. This tends to create the impression that they are typical of the group and that all members of the group are extremists. During the civil rights era, journalists stopped mentioning the race of criminals for this reason. But it is still one of the leading causes of polarization because each side comes to believe the other is mostly extremists when in fact most people are usually quite reasonable. And it can be a self-fulfilling cycle because when people on one side stereotype the other side, it will make the other side less tolerant of them and more likely to demonize them in return.
  • Another method of demonization is the use of inappropriate or undeserved epithets such as lefty, snowflake, social justice warrior, Nazi, misogynist, or racist to describe someone or a group. These types of epithets are used to deliberately prejudice you by making you think someone is an extremist when their point of view might be reasonable. You will often find, if you look carefully, that people who have different political views from you are not evil or stupid. They are just in a different situation or circumstances and they are affected by government policy in ways that are different from you.
  • Problems can be identified and solutions found without fomenting anger, fear, and hate. Those who are fostering those emotions are not the good guys no matter which side they claim to be on.
  • Even reading an article or watching a video made by someone who is angry can influence you and make you angry too. Many bloggers are angry and write posts that spread their anger to their readers.
  • In many cases in history, people who were on the wrong side thought they were doing good. If your basic assumptions about people who disagree with you are wrong, you can easily be on the wrong side and not know it.
  • Out of context quotes are often used to make people think someone said something they never really said. In written articles, notice if quotation marks are used to indicate a direct quotation. If not, they may be paraphrasing or mischaracterizing what someone said. If you can find a video of the story that has the person making the quote that shows what they said before and after they made the statement, that can be very helpful, but video clips with just the quote might be taken out of context too.
  • Predictions of doom and disaster that never really occur are another way they play on our emotions.
  • Be suspicious about "ordinary people" or "protesters" who are really political operatives impersonating ordinary people. Sometimes they fool the journalists quoting them, sometimes the journalists are complicit in the fraud.
  • Headlines are often misleading. Writers want you to read their stories so they often use misleading headlines to spark your interest or get a rise out of your emotions. Just scanning the headlines without reading the stories is a good way to becomes misinformed. When you read an article, you should try to click through to the original source of the information if possible so you can better assess if it is reliable or not. If possible, use a search engine to see what other information is available and if there are corroborating sources or other points of view.
  • Many journalists are not objective reporters of facts. They may have strong opinions and instead of trying to write news stories objectively, they deliberately try to sway public opinion through their work by expressing opinions, making partisan arguments, using compelling images and audio, or withholding information that doesn't support the point of view they are trying to spread. When journalists try to influence pubic opinion, it can be particularly effective because many people assume journalists report objectively and if they don't suspect someone is trying to manipulate them, it is much easier for them to be influenced because they will not be as critical in judging what they hear or read. Also, many journalists might not be deliberately manipulative, but everyone has their own opinions and will influence others through the way they communicate through their tone of voice, choice of words and facial expressions. Even if journalists think they are being objective, the are most probably not.
  • Astroturf movements are political movements that are orchestrated by political organizations but made to look like they are grass roots movements - movements rising spontaneously among ordinary people. When you hear about protests, try to find out who is funding them. If they are not funded by many individual donations from the public but by one or a few foundations or political organizations, then those protests are not genuine, they are political operations designed to manipulate the public. The astroturf link above also discusses how people are manipulated and includes a few videos on the subject.
  • Politicians and journalists promote distorted ways of thinking that are characteristic of mental illness. Cognitive therapy is one of the most effective forms of psychological treatment. It teaches people to recognize and eliminate distorted thinking that can cause depression and anxiety. Listening to politicians and journalists is the opposite of cognitive therapy, they teach people the distorted ways of thinking that cognitive therapy is designed to eliminate. In addition to increased rates of anxiety and depression, the cognitive distortions prevent many people from thinking rationally about politics.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

    Below is a list of fifteen common cognitive distortions from psychcentral.com

    1. Filtering. We take the negative details and magnify them while filtering out all positive aspects of a situation.

    2. Polarized Thinking (or “Black and White” Thinking). In polarized thinking, things are either “black-or-white.”

    3. Overgeneralization. In this cognitive distortion, we come to a general conclusion based on a single incident or a single piece of evidence.

    4. Jumping to Conclusions. Without individuals saying so, we know what they are feeling and why they act the way they do.

    5. Catastrophizing. We expect disaster to strike, no matter what.

    6. Personalization. Personalization is a distortion where a person believes that everything others do or say is some kind of direct, personal reaction to the person.

    7. Control Fallacies. If we feel externally controlled, we see ourselves as helpless a victim of fate.

    8. Fallacy of Fairness. We feel resentful because we think we know what is fair, but other people won’t agree with us.

    9. Blaming. We hold other people responsible for our pain, or take the other track and blame ourselves for every problem.

    10. Shoulds. We have a list of ironclad rules about how others and we should behave.

    11. Emotional Reasoning. We believe that what we feel must be true automatically.

    12. Fallacy of Change. We expect that other people will change to suit us if we just pressure or cajole them enough.

    13. Global Labeling. We generalize one or two qualities into a negative global judgment.

    14. Always Being Right. We are continually on trial to prove that our opinions and actions are correct.

    15. Heaven’s Reward Fallacy. We expect our sacrifice and self-denial to pay off, as if someone is keeping score.

    Scott Adams has written an article explaining how to tell if you are suffering from distorted thinking since it causes symptoms of "cognitive dissonance". Adams uses the example of the overreaction to President Trump that many Democrats experienced as an example of evidence of distorted thinking. If you don't agree with Adams' political views, it is still worth reading the excerpt below because the principles can be applied in other situation and are worth understanding.

    How to Know You're in a Mass Hysteria Bubble, by Scott Adams, August 17, 2017
    http://blog.dilbert.com/2017/08/17/how-to-know-youre-in-a-mass-hysteria-bubble/

    A mass hysteria happens when the public gets a wrong idea about something that has strong emotional content and it triggers cognitive dissonance that is often supported by confirmation bias. In other words, people spontaneously hallucinate a whole new (and usually crazy-sounding) reality and believe they see plenty of evidence for it.

    1. The trigger event for cognitive dissonance

      On November 8th of 2016, half the country learned that everything they believed to be both true and obvious turned out to be wrong. The people who thought Trump had no chance of winning were under the impression they were smart people who understood their country, and politics, and how things work in general. When Trump won, they learned they were wrong. They were so very wrong that they reflexively (because this is how all brains work) rewrote the scripts they were seeing in their minds until it all made sense again. The wrong-about-everything crowd decided that the only way their world made sense, with their egos intact, is that either the Russians helped Trump win or there are far more racists in the country than they imagined, and he is their king. Those were the seeds of the two mass hysterias we witness today.

    2. The Ridiculousness of it

      ... Compare that to the idea that our president is a Russian puppet. Or that the country accidentally elected a racist who thinks the KKK and Nazis are “fine people.” Crazy stuff....

    3. The Confirmation Bias

      ...If you are inside the mass hysteria bubble, you probably interpreted President Trump’s initial statement on Charlottesville — which was politically imperfect to say the least — as proof-positive he is a damned racist....

    4. The Oversized Reaction

      It would be hard to overreact to a Nazi murder, or to racists marching in the streets with torches. That stuff demands a strong reaction. But if a Republican agrees with you that Nazis are the worst, and you threaten to punch that Republican for not agreeing with you exactly the right way, that might be an oversized reaction.

    5. The Insult without supporting argument

      When people have actual reasons for disagreeing with you, they offer those reasons without hesitation. Strangers on social media will cheerfully check your facts, your logic, and your assumptions. But when you start seeing ad hominem attacks that offer no reasons at all, that might be a sign that people in the mass hysteria bubble don’t understand what is wrong with your point of view except that it sounds more sensible than their own.

    • In an interview on FoxNews@Night with Shannon Bream on March 19, 2018, Scott Adams explained that people don't use logic to make decisions even though we think we do. (2:59: https://youtu.be/vLhcrbtbCEg?t=2m59s):

    We humans ignore facts but we think we don't. The great illusion of life is that we're rational beings making rational decisions most of the time. But when you become a hypnotist, the first thing you learn is that that's backwards and that mostly we're deciding based on our team, our feelings, our emotions, irrational reasons, we make our decision and then we rationalize it no matter how tortured that rationalization is."

    University of Virginia psychologist Jonathan Haidt expressed similar views in his book The righteous Mind. He wrote that people don't use reason to form their beliefs, they use reason to justify their beliefs which they form for emotional reasons. William Saletan described Haidt's views in the Sunday Book Review:

    Why Won’t They Listen? ‘The Righteous Mind,’ by Jonathan Haidt By WILLIAM SALETAN SUNDAY BOOK REVIEW MARCH 23, 2012
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/the-righteous-mind-by-jonathan-haidt.html

    The problem isn’t that people don’t reason. They do reason. But their arguments aim to support their conclusions, not yours. Reason doesn’t work like a judge or teacher, impartially weighing evidence or guiding us to wisdom. It works more like a lawyer or press secretary, justifying our acts and judgments to others.

    People can be persuaded. But we are not persuaded by logical arguments. We are persuaded by psychological tricks of various types that take advantage of various instinctive human behaviors. These behaviors are probably in some way evolutionarily adaptive but they have little basis in reason.

  • Blair Warren wrote: "People will do anything for those who encourage their dreams, justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions and help them throw rocks at their enemies." If you are aware of this, you will be more resistant to this method of persuasion. Learn more about this at: http://www.actionplan.com/pdf/BlairWarren.pdf
  • It is easier to be fooled by something that seems to agree with your beliefs than by something that contradicts them.
  • Certain words can influence you to think in ways that will cause your own mind to aid in persuading you. For example, if someone says, "Imagine ...", it causes you to visualize what they want to to believe. "Because" is also a "power" word. When you give a reason, even a weak one, people are more likely to do what you ask. "You" is another "power" word. More of these "power" words and explanations of why they work can be found at these links:
  • Robert Cialdini is a professor of psychology who is a well known author on the subject of persuasion. He has identified several "principles of influence": http://changingminds.org/techniques/general/cialdini/cialdini.htm
    • Reciprocity - We feel obliged to give back to people who have given to us.
    • Consistency and commitment - When we make a promise, we feel obliged to work hard to fulfil that promise. When we make a decision, we like to feel that this is the right decision for us.
    • Social proof - We copy what others do, especially when we are unsure.
    • Liking - If you can make people like you for example by showing them you are like them and or by praising them, they will be easier to persuade.
    • Authority - We defer to people who seem superior.
    • Scarcity - When things become less available, they become more desirable.
    • Click, Whirr - When certain cues are presented to us, we feel an urge to complete actions that have, in the past, been successfully paired with the cue.
    https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/282642
    • Unity - Any sense of shared identity such as family, ethnicity, geography, etc. can aid in persuasion.
    .

    You can take an on-line quiz to test your knowledge of these principles at https://www.qzzr.com/.

  • Subliminal Persuasion, Conversational Hypnosis: The web site nlpnation.com explains several techniques of subliminal persuasion or conversational hypnosis.

    If someone tries to influence you directly you might naturally resist them. But there are several techniques that can be used to sneak information past your "resistance filter". The general principle is that instead of making a statement or suggestion directly, it is included in a broader statement so you hear it indirectly while you are focused on something else.

    1. Questions: If someone makes a direct statement, you might doubt it. But if they put the information into a question that assumes what they want you to believe, you may get distracted thinking about the answer to the question rather than whether the premise is true.
    2. "And" and "But": If someone tells you something you don't want to hear you might start to argue with them. But if they give you the bad news first followed by "but" and something good or positive, you are less likely to start arguing. They also might add more positive statements linked by "and".
    3. Because: People are more likely to do what they're asked if given a reason even if the reason is not very compelling. If things seem to make sense people don't look too closely at it and it may slip past their resistance filter.
    4. A means B: This is another way to sneak things through your resistance filter. If you're reading this, it means you are learning important information that will help you avoid being manipulated. That sentance was an example of a means b. Did you notice it?
    5. Awareness patterns: Certain words and phrases cause you to assume what is being said is true rather than question it. For example, "As you know ... ", "Clearly...", "Undoubtedly ...", "I'm sure you realize / notice / see ..."
    6. Agreement Frames: Instead of disagreeing outright someone may say they agree, but then try to convince you of something else. "I agree, and this means ..." or "I agree, and what's more ...". Notice they use the word "and" not "but". They may agree in principle or agree that something about what you said is true without ever directly saying they disagree.
    7. Pacing and Leading: This technique tries to sneak a suggestion past your resistance filter by presenting you with a natural progression of events. You get distracted by the logic of the progression and are more willing to accept the suggestion.
    The article at nlpnation.com has links to pages with example that illustrate these methods.

Back to Contents

Addiction to the News
An article at bigthink.com, by David Hirschman explains how dopamine causes addiction.

"If a drug produces increases in dopamine in these limbic areas of the brain, then your brain is going to understand that signal as something that is very reinforcing, and will learn it very rapidly," says Volkow. "And so that the next time you get exposed to that stimuli, your brain already has learned that that's reinforcing, and you immediately—what we call a type of memory that's conditioning—will desire that particular drug." Over time, the consistently high levels of dopamine create plastic changes to the brain, desensitizing neurons so that they are less affected by it, and decreasing the number of receptors. That leads to the process of addiction, wherein a person loses control and is left with an intense drive to compulsively take the drug."
The article is about addictive drugs but the article at Cracked.com linked above explains that the same process occurs when you experience anger from items such as news articles you see on the internet.

Back to Contents

Firehose of Falsehood: Modern Propaganda
The term "Firehose of Falsehoods" mentioned in the article at cracked.com refers to a Russian propaganda technique that is very similar what happens when we follow the news. It is explained in the article The Russian “Firehose of Falsehood” Propaganda Mode by Christopher Paul and Miriam Matthews at rand.org. Below are excerpts that give a brief overview of what it is and how it works.

Distinctive Features of the Contemporary Model for Russian Propaganda

1. High-volume and multichannel
2. Rapid, continuous, and repetitive
3. Lacks commitment to objective reality
4. Lacks commitment to consistency

...
Why Is Rapid, Continuous, and Repetitive Propaganda Successful?

• First impressions are very resilient.
• Repetition leads to familiarity, and familiarity leads to acceptance.
...
How Does Propaganda Undercut Perceptions of Reality?

• People are poor judges of true versus false information—and they do not necessarily remember that particular information was false.
• Information overload leads people to take shortcuts in determining the trustworthiness of messages.
• Familiar themes or messages can be appealing even if they are false.
• Statements are more likely to be accepted if backed by evidence, even if that evidence is false.
• Peripheral cues—such as an appearance of objectivity—can increase the credibility of propaganda.
The full article contains a section on how to combat this kind of propaganda ... it is not an optimistic assessment.

KGB Defector Yuri Bezmenov explained the purpose of inconsistent messages:
http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/brainwashing/2007/bezmenov.htm

What it basically means is: to change the perception of reality of every American that despite of the abundance of information no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.
More here:
http://higginswar.blogspot.com/2017/08/fascinating-kgb-defector-yuri-bezmenov.html

Every day we are bombarded by so many sources of information that are unreliable, if we don't make a deliberate effort to notice whether information is reliable or not, we are very likely to be misinformed and easily manipulated by journalists, politicians, and political organizations who are using us for their own personal gain.

Back to Contents

Related Information

Back to Contents

“Fake” news versus “wrong” news: a nonideological approach to a smarter readership – Charles J Glasser 1/13/18
https://inforrm.org/2018/01/31/fake-news-versus-wrong-news-a-nonideological-approach-to-a-smarter-readership-charles-j-glasser/

... by using some simple Internet tools and little bit of detective work we can use five steps to sort the wheat from the chaff and become better journalists, commentators and readers

...

1. Domain Registry is the First Sign of Fakeness.

...

2.Lack of Contactable or Experienced Staff

...

3. Lack of Journalistic Legacy

...

4. Lack of Corrections, Updates and Self-Policing

...

5. Does this Make Sense?

Copyright © 2017 by higginswar All rights reserved. Texts quoted from other sources are Copyright © by their owners.
at
Labels: , ,