| > The persuasive benefits that Russian propagandists gain from presenting the first version of events (which then must be dislodged by true accounts at much greater effort) could be removed if the true accounts were instead presented first. Or at all. Just about every news outlet threw credibility away in a frenzy of mass hysteria these last 18 months. There's simply few bastions of impartiality left. > corrections that provide an alternative story to help fill the resulting gap in understanding when false “facts” are removed. So, like "alternative facts"? > Our fourth suggestion for responding to Russian propaganda: Compete! A bigger, better firehose! One on the right side of history™. The sad reality is that people don't care about the truth nearly as much as they care about information which validates their worldview. The market acknowledges this and behaves accordingly. Furthermore, not all truths are equally palpable and I'd argue that repeated censorship of uncomfortable/offensive truths has caused a breach of trust so wide that it has cast doubt on sources of information as a whole. See the 'Fake News' phenomenon. It's from this set of experiences that people are lured to RT and 'alternative' sources of news. The next thing you know they're buying a years supply of Survival Shield X-2 Nascent iodine on infowars. |