Misinformation / Disinformation

"If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. It really is public brainwashing and misinformation."

- Robert Kane Pappas

"The cornerstone of democracy rests on the foundation of an educated electorate."

- Thomas Jefferson

Propaganda is to a democracy what violence is to a dictatorship.

- Willian Blum

Misinformation and Disinformation Defined

Although the primary purpose of this website is to present information about the journey of wholeness and emerging ideas and paradigms supporting that journey, it is important to discuss the push back that often occurs with shifting paradigms and even new ideas. History is replete with all kinds of examples.

In any field of human endeavor, paradigm shifts are often met with resistance. It does not matter whether the change is in scientific understanding, medical breakthroughs, technological advancements, political ideologies, societal norms or even metaphysical assumptions underlying science. Paradigm shifts are rarely flawless and are often met with skepticism, fear, and, at times, the spread of deliberate misinformation or even falsehoods. It happens for a variety of reasons. Perhaps one of the most sinister motivations is derived from those individuals, institutions or power structures who have a vested interest in maintaining the current paradigm because either their wealth, influence or status is derived from maintaining the status quo.

Whether unintentional or deliberately misrepresenting facts, both serve as a barrier to progress and delays the acceptance of new ideas and new paradigms. Misinformation, which includes both unintentionally false information (misinformation) and intentionally misleading information (disinformation), pose significant challenges to individual well-being, public health, and even civic life. (For the remainder of this webpage, we will generally refer to both misinformation and disinformation as "distorted information".)

Continuous repetition of “false facts” that are represented as truths or misinformation is a common method of casting doubt and denying the veracity of emerging paradigms. The old adage of “telling a lie often enough and people will eventually start believing it as truth” especially when coming from so-called authority figures or institutions certainly applies here. However, ultimately the weight of evidence usually prevails and eventually the new idea or paradigm is finally accepted. A key question we all need to be concerned with is how much unnecessary suffering or loss has occurred before the new paradigm is finally accepted?

The Impact of Distorted Information

The spread of distorted information have profound consequences on not only on society, but all living creatures with which we share the planet. This is particularly true when it comes to the rejection or delay of paradigm shifts that could lead to positive advancements and improved well-being for all. The most immediate impact is the stagnation of innovation or changes that may even affect the quality of life. If enough people are convinced by distorted information that a shift is harmful or unnecessary, the development and implementation of new ideas or paradigms can be delayed, sometimes for decades or even longer.

For example, distorted information surrounding sustainable and eco-friendly farming practices have delayed the widespread adoption of agricultural technologies that could improve drought resistance, increase nutritional value and improve food security. Similarly, false claims about the human technological impact on the global climate will lead to “climate refugees” around the globe due to excessive droughts, deluges or rising sea levels. It will also have very serious economic impacts as floods, severe weather, disease, property damage and rising insurance rates all take their toll.

Distorted information also erode public trust in science, experts, and institutions. When the general public is exposed to conflicting information, especially when it comes from trusted sources like politicians, scientists, media outlets, or influencers, it becomes increasingly difficult for them to discern the truth. This lack of trust can result in the rejection of expert advice, making it harder to implement critical changes needed for societal advancement or to prevent existential crises.

The Broader Consequences

The broader consequences of distorted information in the context of opposing paradigm shifts are deeply concerning. If left unchecked, they can fuel polarization and division within society. When individuals or groups are exposed to distorted information that aligns with their existing beliefs, they become more entrenched in their views, making it harder to reach common ground. This division can impede collective action, making it difficult for societies to address pressing issues such as climate change, public health, or social inequality.

Additionally, distorted information can perpetuate the power of entrenched interests that benefit from the status quo. When people resist change due to false information, the institutions that profit from outdated systems or the old paradigms are able to maintain their dominance. This perpetuates inequalities and prevents progress, further hindering the realization of a more just and equitable society.

The Role of Distorted Information in Opposing Change

Those who oppose a new paradigm or new ideas often employ distorted information or promote the spread of “alternative facts” to achieve their objectives. This has the following implications:

Undermining Credibility: One of the most effective ways to stifle the adoption of a new paradigm is by discrediting the ideas or the individuals behind them. Distorted information can be used to portray proponents of change as untrustworthy, incompetent, or driven by ulterior motives. For example, the scientific community’s advocacy for climate change action has often been met with distorted information campaigns that attempt to cast doubt on the validity of climate science, labeling scientists as biased or politically motivated.
Creating Fear and Uncertainty: Opposition to change often thrives on fear. Distorted information campaigns exploit this fear by presenting exaggerated or fabricated consequences of the new paradigm. In the case of renewable energy, for instance, distorted information has been spread about the dangers of wind and solar power, claiming they are inefficient, unreliable, or harmful to the environment. These campaigns aim to foster anxiety about the future and encourage people to resist change.
Distracting from the Core Issues: Distorted information is also used as a smokescreen to divert attention from the central issues at hand. Instead of engaging with the merits of a new paradigm, the distorted information redirects focus toward irrelevant or distorted points. In the case of public health issues, distorted information campaigns often focus on discredited studies or distorted data, steering public discourse away from the overwhelming scientific consensus supporting it.
Manipulating Public Opinion: Modern media and social media platforms have amplified the reach and speed of distorted information. Those opposed to paradigm shifts can leverage these platforms to spread false narratives quickly and widely. This manipulation of public opinion can create a vocal opposition that drowns out reasonable discourse, causing society to hesitate or even reject necessary changes.

Conclusion

Distorted information or promoting “alternative facts” are powerful tools used by those individuals and institutions who oppose new ideas or paradigm shifts to protect their own interests and resist change. Whether through undermining credibility, stoking fear, distracting from key issues, or manipulating public opinion, distorted information plays a crucial role in delaying or obstructing progress. The consequences of such distorted information are far-reaching, ranging from the stagnation of innovation to the erosion of public trust and the exacerbation of societal divisions. As we continue to navigate major paradigm shifts in areas like climate change, technology, and social justice, it is essential for individuals, institutions, and the media to be vigilant in identifying and combating distorted information. Only through a clear, informed, and open-minded approach can we successfully embrace the paradigm shifts and new ideas that will shape a better future for all.

How to Identify Distorted Information

Discussing effective strategies for spotting distorted information is beyond the scope of this web site. However, for an excellent discussion on how to identify and deal with it can be found by visiting the LIS Education Network and their excellent article on “What is Misinformation and How Does It Impact Society?”. Click on the link to check it out.

For more information on disinformation and misinformation (no pun intended) continue reading below....

Information, Facts, Truths and Falsehoods

Information can be based on anything including fictions, opinions, beliefs or truths. Anyone can fabricate and promote a fiction. These stories require very little effort to create and to spread. All that’s needed is an imagination and the motivation to do it. Falsehoods are often created because of hidden or unspoken intentions relating to status, power, influence, control or monetary gain of the person or group promoting them over some other individual or group. Unfortunately, it is not always easy to discern fiction from truth especially if it is repeated often enough or told by a so-called authority or respected person or institution in our lives. And now, with modern technologies, it’s easier than ever to create and disseminate fiction masquerading as truth.

Promoting information based on truth requires much more effort than falsehoods. It has to be researched, analyzed, validated and verified. In the process related information has to be verified or tossed out. These are all tasks which require much more effort than creating a falsehood. Promoting them is much more time consuming, demanding and expensive than spreading a convenient fictional account no matter the subject. Sometimes truths can be hurtful but without discernment of truth from fiction, there can be no real understanding nor opportunity for improvement of the human condition without it.

The scientific method is a methodology that has been developed and refined over the last 350 years to discern truth from falsehood about the natural world. An observation of some objective aspect of nature is made and a hypothesis (an educated guess) is then developed to determine the cause of the observational results. The hypothesis leads to an actual experiment in a controlled environment to determine if the hypothesis can stand up to further scrutiny. If the hypothesis is experimentally falsified either the underlying assumptions, the experimental procedures used to validate the hypothesis, or the interpretations of the results are invalid. A new hypothesis must be developed. Rewash, rinse and repeat.

On the other hand, if repeated experimentation by peers leads to the same conclusion over and over, then the hypothesis is assumed to be true and may become a theory. In science theories can only be falsified, they can never be proven as absolute truth. Theories require independent and repeatable validation by peers (people who are acknowledged as experts in their field with similar education, training and experience). This becomes the consensus view of a group of recognized experts. Theories are often refined over time; Newton’s Theory of Gravity was refined by Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity which is now undergoing further refinements (ex. Quantum Loop Gravity) to accommodate recent new scientific observations that were impossible to make in earlier times.

The scientific method relies on a rigorous procedure that is objective, measurable, repeatable and subject to peer review. Unfortunately, there are many things in life that cannot use the scientific method to validate them. In medical research, sociology, finance and other similar fields, the scientific method is more difficult to use because it is very difficult to control the experimental environment so statistical methods must be used which are not nearly as accurate.

Any subjective experience (first person perspective) falls into the category which, unfortunately, is very difficult to use with the scientific method. This also includes fictional accounts, opinions and beliefs. None of these can be objectively measured and can change simply with a person’s state of mind or intention. They are also impossible or very difficult to reproduce since they only occur in the mind of the beholder.

Truths are the consensus reality of recognized experts in a field. They are usually backed up by objective facts. Facts are expensive to develop, are often nuanced or complex, time consuming and expensive to research, develop and validate. And, they can be falsified as additional evidence becomes available or as underlying assumptions are proven incorrect.

Fiction is usually deliberately made up – it can be a story for entertainment or a falsehood presented as truth. If presented as a story without intentional harm it is called misinformation. If the intention of the story was to cause harm it is called disinformation. Fiction is cheap and usually simple to develop. Just because it is told over and over does not make it truth but lazy people will often accept fictional stories as truth if they are repeated often enough.

Misinformation – information that is misconstrued, misunderstood or misinterpreted – is usually not done maliciously but often out of ignorance. Misinformed people often unknowingly use their own biases and ignore valid evidence that conflicts with their beliefs or opinions.

An opinion is a personal view that may or may not be factual – may or may not have any basis in reality. They are often presented by the holder as factual. Opinions are often based on beliefs, unquestioned assumptions that are often programmed into us by authority figures in our lives, many at an early age before we have developed the cognitive abilities to judge the veracity of it for ourselves. Confirmation bias occurs when we look for information that confirms our opinions and beliefs and ignore or reject information that does not. Unfortunately for many of us, we too often seek out or reject information based on these biases to prevent cognitive dissonance and having to deal with the conflicting thoughts they may represent.

Information is not synonymous with truth. We are drowning in information in the 21st century due to the widespread use of information technologies which all of us now have immediate access to with our smart phones, computers, websites, the Internet, and social media platforms. Much of it is tailored to our personal interests and our likings (and our biases) by AI or other computer algorithms. And, so much of it is BS. And, most importantly, they are often not truthful and created to gain some type of advantage over another individual or group.

So, beware. Good people receiving bad information (e.g. untruthful or inaccurate information) can unknowingly make bad decisions that either hurt themselves or hurt other people. Worse yet they may even cause a lot of needless and unnecessary physical or emotional suffering.

In the age of the proliferation of misinformation and disinformation, learn how to identify and discern truth from falsehood, no matter how difficult the effort… your wellbeing or that of your loved ones may depend upon it.

The Power of Asking the Right Questions

In today’s age of misinformation and deliberate disinformation, it is very likely that you will come across people with very different beliefs or ideas from your own. Some of it may be an honest difference of opinion; some of it may be due to misunderstanding or deliberate disinformation to promote vested interests. How can you have an honest conversation to express your ideas or understand where the other person or group is coming from in a non-argumentative and often unproductive way? This writing contains the wisdom of Alan Watts that I hope you will find enlightening and useful.

Who was Alan Watts?

Alan Watts (1915–1973) was a British-born American philosopher, writer, and speaker best known for interpreting and popularizing Eastern philosophy (particularly Zen Buddhism, Taoism, and Hinduism) for Western audiences. Watts played a pivotal role in the mid-20th-century counterculture movement, introducing concepts like the "wisdom of insecurity" and the non-dualistic view of existence to the Beat Generation and the hippie movement.

Watts was a prolific author of over 25 books, including the bestseller The Way of Zen (1957), and gained widespread fame through his influential radio broadcasts and lectures in the San Francisco Bay Area. Although he was briefly ordained as an Episcopalian priest and served as a chaplain at Northwestern University, he left the ministry in 1950 to fully pursue his work in comparative religion and mysticism, eventually becoming a central figure in the Human Potential Movement and a respected voice in psychotherapy and spirituality.

Watts’ Timeless Ideas on Having Productive Discussions

There is a strange thing about arguments. The moment someone raises their voice, speaks with absolute certainty, or tries to make you feel small, you may feel an immediate urge to fight back. You want to prove them wrong. You want to give them an answer so powerful that they have nothing left to say.

What if you did something completely different? What if instead of answering their argument, you simply ask three questions? Not angry questions, not insulting questions. Questions asked with enough calmness that the other person is forced to listen to their own words. Because sometimes the most powerful way to silence foolishness is not to speak louder than it. It is to make it explain itself.

The First Question

The first question is simple. “What exactly do you mean?” It sounds almost too ordinary, but it can change an entire conversation. People often speak in vague statements because vague statements are difficult to challenge. They say “every own knows that”. They say “you're always like this”. They say “nobody respects you”. They say “that's just the way things are”. But ask them “what exactly do you mean?” Suddenly they have to move from emotion to meaning. They have to explain the sentence they just threw at you. And very often when a person is forced to define what they are saying, the strength of their argument begins to disappear. Not because you attack them, but because you ask them to become precise.

This is one of the quietest forms of strength. You do not have to compete with someone's volume. You do not have to interrupt them. You do not have to insult them. You simply slow the conversation down. “What exactly do you mean?” Then listen. Really listen. Do not prepare your comeback while they are speaking. Give them enough space to reveal what is actually behind their words. Sometimes you will discover that there is a reasonable concern underneath the anger and sometimes you will discover that there is nothing substantial there at all. Either way, you have gained something valuable. You have clarity and clarity is far more powerful than winning an argument.

The Second Question

The second question is “How do you know that?” This question is even more powerful because people often confuse confidence with evidence. Someone can say something with complete certainty and still have no reason to believe it. Someone can repeat an opinion so many times that they eventually mistake repetition for truth. So instead of saying you're wrong, simply ask “how do you know that?”

Now the person has to examine the foundation of their statement. Is it something they experienced, something they verified, something they heard from someone else? Or is it simply an assumption they have carried for years without ever questioning it? Notice the difference between these two approaches.

If you say that's stupid, the other person immediately becomes defensive. Their ego enters the conversation and now the discussion becomes a battle between identities. But if you calmly ask, "How do you know that?" You are not attacking the person. You are examining the idea.

That distinction matters. You are examining the idea. That distinction matters. A wise person does not need to destroy another person's dignity in order to challenge their thinking. You can question an idea without humiliating the person who holds it. And sometimes the person may discover that they do not actually know. They may pause. They may become uncomfortable. They may even become angry. But that pause can be valuable because it creates the possibility of thought.

The Third Question

The third question is “What would change your mind?” This may be the most revealing question of all because there is a difference between someone who has reached a conclusion and someone who has built an identity around being right. A person who is genuinely interested in truth can say, "If I discover better evidence, I will reconsider." But a person who is only interested in winning may have no answer. Nothing could change their mind because the purpose of the conversation was never understanding. The purpose was control. When you ask what would change your mind, you discover whether you are speaking with someone who is searching for truth or simply defending a position.

Question their Assumptions

These three questions can transform the way you deal with difficult people:

“What exactly do you mean?”
“How do you know that?”
“What would change your mind?”

Notice that none of them requires anger. None requires a clever insult. None requires you to prove that you are more intelligent. They simply create space for the other person to examine their own thinking. And this is where you must remember something important. Your goal should not be to shut every person's mouth. Sometimes the person in front of you is not worth the conversation. Sometimes silence is wiser. If someone is deliberately provoking you, you do not owe them an intellectual performance. You can simply say, "I don't think this conversation is going anywhere." And walk away.

Freedom is in realizing that you do not have to win every argument. Your ego may tell you that you must have the final word, but ask yourself, what do you actually gain by having it? If the person refuses to listen, another sentence may accomplish nothing. If they are committed to misunderstanding you, another explanation may only exhaust you.

Disrespectful Conversations

If the conversation has become disrespectful, the strongest response may be, "I'm willing to discuss this, but I'm not willing to be insulted." That is a boundary. You are not running away from the conversation. you are refusing to participate in a conversation that has lost its dignity. This is where emotional control becomes essential. A person who can control their emotions has an enormous advantage in difficult conversations.

When someone wants you angry, remaining calm changes the entire dynamic. When someone wants you defensive, asking a question keeps you centered. When someone wants you to prove yourself, refusing to perform for them protects your peace. You begin to understand that not every attack requires a counterattack.

Pause Before Responding

Sometimes the strongest response is curiosity. Sometimes it is silence. Sometimes it is a boundary and sometimes it is simply walking away. You do not become powerful by controlling other people. You become powerful by no longer allowing other people's behavior to control you. Think about how many arguments in your life could have been avoided if you had paused before responding. Someone says something offensive and you immediately react. Someone misunderstands you and you rush to defend yourself. Someone criticizes you and you feel that you must prove them wrong.

What if you paused and asked, "What exactly do you mean?" What if you followed with, "How do you know that?" And finally, “What would change your mind?” Suddenly, the emotional heat begins to disappear and the actual structure of the conversation becomes visible. You are no longer fighting a person. You are examining an idea and that shift can protect you from countless unnecessary conflicts.

The Ideas Behind the Questions

Remember, these questions are not weapons. Do not use them with arrogance. Do not ask them with a sarcastic smile simply because you want to embarrass someone. The moment your intention becomes humiliation, you have already entered the same game you are trying to escape. Ask because you genuinely want clarity. Ask because you want to understand. Ask because you are interested in whether the belief has a foundation. And if the other person has a better argument, be willing to hear it. That is the real mark of strength.

You are not trying to prove that you are always right. You are strong enough to discover that you might be wrong. And perhaps that is the deeper lesson. The wisest person in the room is not necessarily the person who speaks the most. Sometimes it is the person who can remain quiet long enough to notice what everyone else is missing. You do not need to answer every insult. You do not need to correct every opinion. You do not need to defend yourself against every accusation

Choose Your Conversations

Choose your conversations carefully. When a conversation deserves your attention, ask thoughtful questions. When it becomes meaningless, protect your peace. When someone crosses a boundary, speak clearly. And when someone refuses to respect that boundary, remember that leaving is also an answer.

The next time someone tries to overwhelm you with confidence, anger, or empty certainty, remember the three questions.

“What exactly do you mean?”
“How do you know that?”
“And what would change your mind?”

Ask them calmly. Then listen. You may discover that the person has something valuable to say. Or you may discover their certainty was built on nothing more than assumption. Either way, you remain in control of yourself. And that is the real victory. Not making someone look foolish. Not having the final word, but becoming so calm, so clear, and so secure within yourself that you no longer need to fight every battle. Sometimes the strongest person in the conversation is the one who does not need to win.

This article was extracted from a YouTube video published by the Alan Watts zone on YouTube. The link to the video is:

Watch this video on how to identify distorted information

Yuval Noah Harari: How to safeguard your mind in the age of junk information