I don't think you are wrong. I would not dare to suggest there are easy answers here. My initial reaction was to attempt to argue that we are not, in fact a democracy, completely derailing the conversation in an attempt simply to 'win' an argument. I am oddly surprised with myself over this. There is no ego here. Nothing to prove. And yet, the need to be right on the internet prevails. This agrees with your note that humans are not rational.
I definitely agree that lying is effective. I agree that outrage machine is getting really annoying, but I also found a way to deal with it in an imperfect way. Stop consuming this information and, eventually, stop internalizing this overwhelming pile of crap that is shoved into our minds 24/7.
There is a reason we are a republic. There is a reason we protect ( or at least give lip service to protecting ) minority voices. And that's usually, because popular opinions don't need defenders. And I want those voices protected even if they are unpopular, ill-informed, dishonest, or even just lying.
The alternative is that we ban lying. Period. No cute ads that dance on the edge of misrepresentation. No white lies. You had a shitty day. Say so. No lie of omission. Your company uses child labor, disclose it in 10-k ( oi, all material facts should be available for investors ). No politician talk. We usher a new world where dictionary police is king and every single one of us has to weigh each word carefully..
I feel I should apologize. This post may be now coming across as snarky. I think that fact that I don't really have a good answer makes me frustrated.
I chose to reply to you, specifically, because you were discussing ideas and principles, avoiding getting caught up by personalities and the food fight.
I've been obsessing about rhetoric, persuasion, discourse for way too long. I've tried any thing and every thing suggested. Stuff like David Domke and heroesnarrative.org. I've spent 100s of hours working on framing, wordsmithing, resolutions, whitepapers.
Nothing I've tried has made a lasting difference. Most of it was probably counter productive.
Of course there are some obvious things we (society) can do, short of banning falsehoods.
- Add friction to, and sometimes break, feedback loops to thwart the dopamine rush.
- Decouple (unbundle) activities to create opportunities for competition.
- Prohibit self dealing and other conflicts of interest.
- Ban toxic incentives (targeted ads, freemium).
You may note these remedies have some overlap with the adjacent issues of monopolies and privacy.
Of course, no silver bullets. People smarter than me will surely add to this list. (I barely understand the debates about Section 230.) And I'm still find a response to algorithmic newsfeeds.
All of these measures limit, deny, thwart.
But I want to find positive alternatives. Role models for better behavior. In the marketplace for ideas, I want to be selling the best ideas.
--
Have you listened to KEXP 90.3 FM Seattle (kexp.org) lately? In response to COVID-19, they're now doing mass psychiatry, group therapy with their "You are Not Alone" campaign.
I think this might be one antidote to the outrage machine.
It's a synthesis of many aspects and features you'll recognize. And most of the time these kinds of things backfire. Perceived as insincere empathy and saccharin positivity.
But KEXP somehow makes it work. A slow metamorphosis over years. They're now fulfilling a yearning need for connection and community and calmness that, frankly, is mostly missing in media.
One example of their genius: In response to the ridiculous assaults on the USPS, KEXP did the "Support The Post Office" event, encouraging listeners to send their song requests via USPS. Then one morning they played those requests and read the cards.
Not once did KEXP engage in the food fight. They didn't have to. They only said positive things and encouraged positive actions.
KEXP said what they're for, not what they're against.
Of course KEXP is listener funded, and therefore directly incentivized to do positivity and outreach. Versus ad based outrage machines.
(A few years ago, KEXP canceled their weekend morning shows on politics and current events. I had listened for decades and really liked those programs. But the format and strategy practiced by aging hippies, standard public radio fare, was long past being constructive.)
I'm now wondering how the KEXP experiment can be replicated. Done many many times vs scaled larger.
I'm also wondering if this strategy can reconnect people, help reduce our hyper polarization. Stock advice for cult deprogramming is unconditional acceptance, no judgement. Just be glad your friend or family member is back and listen listen listen.
I like the thought about positive alternatives. I have not heard of KEXP, but I will look into it now. Based on how your describe it, I think we need to stop relying on 'free' sources. If we sufficiently care about information, we should pay for it ( mostly because then we can at least demand value for the money ). The ad supported web does not work well for society as a whole.
I am not against doing the things you mentioned ( adding friction, limiting conflict of interest and so on ). There is a clear need for that. And there are real business interest that would put up a big fight if there was a real threat of implementation.
I definitely agree that lying is effective. I agree that outrage machine is getting really annoying, but I also found a way to deal with it in an imperfect way. Stop consuming this information and, eventually, stop internalizing this overwhelming pile of crap that is shoved into our minds 24/7.
There is a reason we are a republic. There is a reason we protect ( or at least give lip service to protecting ) minority voices. And that's usually, because popular opinions don't need defenders. And I want those voices protected even if they are unpopular, ill-informed, dishonest, or even just lying.
The alternative is that we ban lying. Period. No cute ads that dance on the edge of misrepresentation. No white lies. You had a shitty day. Say so. No lie of omission. Your company uses child labor, disclose it in 10-k ( oi, all material facts should be available for investors ). No politician talk. We usher a new world where dictionary police is king and every single one of us has to weigh each word carefully..
I feel I should apologize. This post may be now coming across as snarky. I think that fact that I don't really have a good answer makes me frustrated.
edit: added don't in last sentence.