|
Title: True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society
Purchase
Item
Manufacturer: Wiley
List Price: $25.95
Our Price: $14.84
|
|
| Customer Reviews: |
| True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society by Wiley Avoiding the Bias Trap | In the last few decades the media has become increasingly polarized across party lines. Conservatives have their own 24/7 news network, their own newspapers, magazines, radio stations, publishing companies. Heck, conservatives don't even have to dip their delicate toes in the perceived liberal pool known as Wikipedia when they have Conservapedia to give them their facts. Liberals have their media but it pales in comparison to the complete parallel universe set up on the right. The point is that it's easy to become insulated in a cocoon of partisan bias to the point where all our information is tailored to confirm preexisting beliefs.
The author uses two examples to show how partisans allow bias to shape their perception of reality. On the right is the Swift Boating of John Kerry and in true `pox on both houses' spirit the author hits the left on the theory that the 2004 election was stolen from Sen. Kerry in Ohio. As a native Ohioan I know a little bit about the subject. Mr. Manjoo mentions that conservative Ken Blackwell was, at the time, the secretary of state AND chief elections officer creating a rather blatant conflict of interest. What he fails to mention was that Blackwell was also honorary co-chair of the Committee to re-elect George W. Bush. Blackwell had been issuing capricious pre-election rulings seeming designed to suppress voting and failed to supply sufficient voting equipment to many black communities (ironically Blackwell is himself black). The author turns to expert opinion that even without voter suppression Bush would still have won. The fact that the GOP even ATTEMPTED to swing the election, even if their efforts were unnecessary would certainly lend credence to the theory that they may have stolen the state. Given the events of 2000 I don't think it would be any stretch of the imagination to believe that the GOP would try to steal the election in an important swing state. They had means, motive and opportunity. The Swift boating of John Kerry, on the other hand, was created from whole cloth and pushed by the GOP establishment.
The fact is that these two examples are far from equal. From Global Warming to Intelligent Design to Saddam Hussein's supposed involvement in 9/11, Republican's are far more likely to believe utter BS while ignoring expert opinion. The author even points to several studies that show this to be true. So here is where it gets tricky. Is it true, as the author states, that Republican's are more likely to give into their bias or is it just my own bias that leads me to this belief. How can people avoid falling into the bias trap? I think the first step would be to be vigilant and self aware and read a book like this as a check on your self. To me the difference between the Swift boating and the Ohio election results seems stark but to a Republican they will likely see the opposite.
One angle the writer fails to mention is the results when the media tries bending over backwards to remain fully objective and essentially becoming stenographers. Permitting politicians and pundits to speak without analyzing the veracity of their statements turns any argument into a he says/she says situation with viewers falling in line with whatever side holds their point of view. Also, there is no mention of the media feedback loop. Viewers tend to watch news that validates their beliefs thus reinforcing and expanding those beliefs causing them to seek even more partisan sources.
It's easy to slip into biased thinking because it's effortless. No reason to expend energy thinking when all your beliefs are handed to you. This is why partisans tend to follow the party line across the board. The author quotes psychologist Lee Ross who wrote, "If we think we see the world the way it is... then we think that reasonable people ought to agree with us, we conclude that they are not reasonable - they're biased" I am definitely guilty of this. For instance it is mind blowing to me that half of registered voters could possibly think that a candidate with policies so close to GWB would make a good president. How can they be so blind? And when I watched the Bush/Kerry debates in 2004, Kerry seemed poised and controlled while Bush looked petulant and abrasive, meanwhile Republican's I knew thought Bush won the debates. I thought Sarah Palin was embarrassing in her first interview by Charles Gibson but others thought she hit a home run. This is the point where I need to step back, reassess myself to see if I've fallen into the bias trap... or maybe I'm just correct. | | True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society by Wiley Read it! | | Thought-provoking conclusions. He writes (well) about things you already know, but he fleshes them out far more than you've ever considered. This book will change the way you see the world. If enough of you read this book, it will change our country. | | True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society by Wiley Does the "truth" set one free? | Thanks to Farhad Manjoo for the effort that went into this book. I began reading Manjoo's technical writings in Salon Magazine a while back, and thoroughly enjoy his writing style.
Although he's employed primarily as a writer for technology developments, Mr. Manjoo displays a genuine awareness of the elements of human nature that shape our decision-making processes. There are now several books that address "why we think the way we think" but this one focuses on the role that the media and technology contribute to our understanding of "fact" or "truth." He begins his adventure describing the word "truthiness" that originated from Stephen Colbert's show, and lays out examples of how, tongue-in-cheek, the concept is completely relevant.
Salon (where he's employed) is a left-leaning magazine, but I would encourage readers to put that aside for the duration of the read. He has criticisms and analysis for both sides of the political debate, but doesn't limit the discussion to politics.
I appreciate the reviewer's prior criticism regarding "why should we believe Manjoo's version of truth?"--that comment captures the essence of the premise of his book. Within the reading, the question becomes "where shall I gather my information, and to what extent do I bestow my trust to that source?" Technology and modern media have made those sources immediate, abundant, and highly personalized; the era of Walter Cronkite is gone forever.
Thanks to the prior reviewers for detailed descriptions of this book--I'd add one more comment: in contrast to the reviewer who found the book slowing down somewhere after the mid-sections, I found the later parts of the book most intriguing. Regarding ideas about trust, and specifically about the perception that we as a society don't trust one another like we did in the days of "Father Knows Best" or "Andy Griffith," Manjoo describes the concept of "particularized trust." This is the human-nature tendency to surround ourselves by like-minded people; it comes at a cost of losing "generalized trust," which is that trust we would put toward "outsiders" or those immediately outside of our circle of friends.
Manjoo isn't wholly pessimistic, but does relay his concern that technology and personalized news have a real potential to further polarize our society. The "information superhighway" hasn't bred a more universal approach to what can be documented--it seems instead to have bred effective and inexpensive methods to generate different versions of the events.
My own hope is that this same technology can come to the rescue in a sense: as "controversial" as Wiki is, there is at least a requirement for documentation of source material, and an agreed-upon method for disagreeing or criticizing or adding to the information. Anyone may be able to "hack" it, but equally anyone can dispute and claim higher ground by sourcing and documenting the reasons for the dispute--we then at least have the chance for dialogue, and people have the opportunity to decide issues based on both sides of that particular issue. To the extent that we remain engaged, we are then given opportunity to learn.
I hope you would enjoy this work as much as I did, and I too wish it would be included in an educational setting within some academic "critical thinking" or "learning to analyze" class. At age 47 now, I wish I had read it at age 15.
Respectfully submitted, Jeff Pickens
| | True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society by Wiley Good writing, disturbing conclusions! | I could not put this book down. Just more evidence (if you needed it), that creatures evolved for finding edible berries, fleeing predators, and making cohesive social groups, have few tools for discerning complex truths. And those few tools are hard to use! Much easier to go with our instincts, or guts, or hearts, or feelings. Easier, quicker, but so very deceptive.
I appreciate, too, that he did not end the book with a feel-good formula for fixing things... there is none. The only solution is hard thinking. | | True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society by Wiley You'll never look at the "news" the same way again | I really really like this book and highly recommend it to everyone. The book describes various cognitive biases that are built into all of us -- things called, such as, selective perception, selective exposure, "experts", particularized trust -- and how these interact with the sudden change in the huge number of news sources brought about by the internet and other information technology changes -- to give us a world where "objective" reality disappears and different people live in their own versions of "reality".
You may disagree with the author's beliefs about the particular examples he uses to illustrate these ideas -- Swiftboat Veterans for Truth, 9/11 conspiracy theories, the Iraq war, global warming, and so on. But his opinion on these things are not really the point of the book. The point of the book is how different people see these things in different ways, and how this difference persists in the face of more news, more information, more photos, more videos, more blogs, etc -- instead of more information getting us closer to the truth, it instead takes us farther away from the truth and further into our own echo chambers. And describing how this process works -- and how certain people, such as savvy public relations firms, try to manipulate the process to get certain ideas and belief out into the public -- is the real point of the book. So, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the authors point of view on any particular examples, I guarantee, after reading this book, you will never look at the "news" the same way again. | | True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society by Wiley Product Description | | Why has punditry lately overtaken news? Why do lies seem to linger so long in the cultural subconscious even after they’ve been thoroughly discredited? And why, when more people than ever before are documenting the truth with laptops and digital cameras, does fact-free spin and propaganda seem to work so well? True Enough explores leading controversies of national politics, foreign affairs, science, and business, explaining how Americans have begun to organize themselves into echo chambers that harbor diametrically different facts—not merely opinions—from those of the larger culture. |
No item elements found in rss feed.
|
