How to Navigate the Online Conspiracy Theory Phenomenon.
**This was initially posted to Face Book as two posts. I am compiling them here for ease of reading**
Here are my thoughts on how to deal with conspiracy theories in our online spaces and the people that spread them.
Part 1:
It seems we have been running ourselves ragged trying to challenge the plethora of mind boggling and even dangerous theories flying around in our online spaces. It’s frustrating, right? We jump into a thread with our common sense, quality resources and science only to be handed back truly bizarre ideologies and youtube video’s of “Doctors” as evidence. Those that have gone down the rabbit hole, for the most part are too invested to hear even what seems to be the most obvious truth.
We have been told that we need to make room for “divergent opinions”. That we are supposed to “dig deeper” and “do our own research” or we are labeled “sheep”. I believe that this line of thinking is baked into conspiracy theory rhetoric as a clever way of keeping us in the conversation. If we feel guilty for not hearing these things out, or watching Dr so and so’s youtube video, then we are more likely to trip and fall down that rabbit hole with them. Or at the very least, give more airtime via algorithms which allows these ideas to be seen by more people.
So, what do we do?
First we must fully accept that in MOST cases you are not going to shake these people out of their conspiracy trance. If you have become used to engaging in call out culture this will be hard. You will see the danger of what is being spouted and want to jump in the fray to try and set the record straight. But how is that working? Not at all in most cases.
Here is what engaging with these posts actually does.
Whenever you comment on a post, it increases the visibility of that post. The more visibility, the more engagement. The more engagement, the more likely people vulnerable to these ideas will jump on the bandwagon.
We cannot change peoples minds, but we can change algorithms. It’s simple. No matter how hard it is. DO NOT engage with social media posts, in any fashion, that spout dangerous disinformation or lies. Breathe deep, and give a pause with this one. What parts of us have become addicted to arguing online as the only way to fight the good fight?
If you MUST add your voice, its far more powerful to send a DM to the person. In a private conversation you are more likely to reach them than in a public one. If you do this, be sure to stay curious and don’t attack them with your info… even if it is “right”.
Also, un-follow is your friend, as well as simply spending less time on social media in general.
For every conspiracy post you see, make your own post highlighting something closer to reality. Keep spreading the GOOD, quality, vetted, accurate and hopefully even positive REAL information… on all levels. Swiftly delete any comments from people spouting obvious conspiracies and/or commenting with aggression rather than curiosity. If they are friends, private message them and kindly ask them not to comment on your posts out of mutual respect.
It is YOUR wall, your feed, your own personal universe in any social media platform you use. You can do what you want with it. Shake off the idea that says you are supposed to “hear out any differing opinions or you are trying to silence voices”. This is BULLSHIT. Of course we want to make room for opinions, and people, that are different than we are. However, there is a huge difference between people with differing opinions who comment with respect, and a genuine desire to dialogue in a civilized manner, and the comments full of righteousness and attack. Keep the former, boot the latter.
In short, I believe we have to treat disinformation like the virus it is. Keep your distance and slow the spread.
Part 2:
One of the potentially dangerous side effects of rampant conspiracy theory spread, is the tendency for us to become so exhausted from wading through the near constant barrage of outlandish nonsense, that we begin to block out ALL content that even remotely resembles conspiracy. If there is any “real” conspiracy, perhaps this is it. Ha!
The truth of the matter is that there is A LOT going on that deserves our attention and awareness. While notions that the virus was created by billionaire Bill Gates in order to microchip us all into submission is clearly coo coo for coconuts, being aware of potential long term impacts on our civil liberties DOES require some looking at. If we reflexively steer away from an article that speaks out in question to the policies that are being put into place, we could miss an important exploration of the unprecedented time we are in. It’s all about degrees. Too far to one extreme or the other probably misses what is closer to reality.
The conspiracy theory haze can then become a smoke screen keeping us from being informed and aware of REAL issues. Conspiracy theories often take one small element of the truth then add a whole bunch of garbage on top. We want to toss the garbage but not toss the kernel of truth embedded.
DISCERNMENT is key here.
So, how do we tell what to toss and what to take a second look at?
First, SLOW DOWN. Unfollowing or unfriending is necessary at times, but notice how quick you are to do it. Make sure you read a post in its entirety, before making that judgment call. Here are few things that I look for that typically indicate a conspiracy theory or non-objective/unbalanced view-point.
- Denigrating language towards any one group. Things like “liberal left” have become slurs and usually indicate a less than objective view point. This goes for both sides, of course.
- Things that read like science fiction… underground tunnels with farmed children that Trump is going to save from pedophile rings, etc etc.
- Doomsday, apocalyptic language. “the time is coming.” “disclosure is nigh” etc
- Anything from Q-anon is pretty much automatically in the trash bin.
- Black and White statements or sensationalist headlines. “Lies exposed” etc.
- Strong statement of opinion as FACT.
- Arguments that include unverified statements of treachery from any valid resources for information.
- Viewpoints that point to a “bad guy” and a “good guy”. The truth if often more nuanced than this.
Once the crazy-making is weeded out, and your nervous system has recovered, other information that may be really useful will be easier to spot. That being said, be careful about dismissing things because they have the same “buzz words” of conspiracy language. Sadly, “wake up” and “dig deeper” are a couple of these terms co-opted by CT folks. What used to be indications of content offering deep spiritual insights, are now an immediate red flag for me. But, I try and still read through to get a bigger picture before deciding how to classify the content.
Source MATTERS. One way to discern what bears further consideration is to choose sources that have a long history of integrity. This will be somewhat subjective but some that I listen to are sources like Democracy Now, and for science, Stanford University.
One of the seriously de-stabilizing effects of the conspiracy theory rabbit hole, is the psychological un-mooring that occurs. If you invest too wholly, all previously trusted authorities become suspect. When pushed to “question everything”, one can come out the other side trusting nothing. This is often writ into the design. Not by the people who spread CT’s, but by the ones who created them in the first place.
We need to be able to trust SOME sources of information in order to be balanced individuals. No one person can know all the things, and we all have our areas of competency and well, areas we are less than competent. If the onus is on us to fully research every little bit of everything and trust no one, unless they are also someone who trusts no-one (hello YouTube videos by sham doctors with egos big enough to believe their own fantasies), than how are we to be settled in life at all?
How can we have the energy to LIVE if we are running around afraid to trust the perspectives of those trained to provide us with information or resources outside of our areas of expertise?
I am just now undertaking reading scientific data about green technologies and let me tell you, my mind may not be up to comprehending most of this… because guess what, I am NOT a scientist! So, I will do my best to read the real data from real scientists, but if I cannot accept that some things will be beyond my understanding, I am more likely to veer into an ideology that makes me feel that I DO understand. If we cannot be humble enough to accept the reality of maybe never being able to grok certain things, we run the risk of going down a path of grasping onto anything that gives a feeling of authority, no matter how outlandish. What better safe zone for a frightened soul grasping for certainty, than to assume that because no information from experts is trustworthy, that “whatever I believe is valid”.
It is my view that the a powerful way to address the barrage of conspiracy theories is to accept that some things we simply will never fully understand and to choose some trusted sources of people who DO. Some you choose will turn out to be wrong. If that happens, you can choose to accept the error and pivot your trust elsewhere. For example, I trusted Michael Moore and so posted his most recent documentary, Planet of the Humans. It has turned out to be grossly misinformed, which is what sparked the desire to read scientific green technology data. While I am grateful for the motivation to be more educated in this regard, I am disappointed to lose a voice that I trusted for his good journalism.
No source is perfectly trust-worthy, but we must choose to trust SOMEONE in the areas we are not versed in. Like love, if we cannot trust, we will find ourselves alone. Trust is a risk, but the alternative is far worse.
Here are some metrics I use to choose who I will trust when it comes to news of the world’s issues.
- Do they cite sources that are peer reviewed and non-sensational?
- Do they correct themselves when they make a mistake? Journalistic integrity demands it, even if the mistake is small, like misplacing a date or a name.
- How measured is their approach? Do they speak to the subtleties and nuances that are inherent in truth or do they use black or white/right or wrong language?
Underneath all of this sharing and challenging of information, whether it be wildly off base or valid, is the strong desire for TRUTH.
If we can begin to relate with one another on the basis of what we hold mutually dear, in this case the search for truth, then we may be able to converse online with less chaotic results.
At the core of things, we are all just humans. Scared, uprooted from our “normal” realities and desperate for the safe harbor of understanding what the fuck is going on. The search for truth is really the search for safety. There is the desire to find THE truth and make it stay, so we can relax. Unfortunately, the truth is often shifty and morphs in time as more is discovered. New technologies get developed that renders the old obsolete. New information comes to light that changes our understanding.
Trusting what is true now, combined with an understanding that we are always in the unknown, is a way to be balanced, mentally strong and healthy. When we trust, we can let go. When we accept the unknown, we remain open to newness
In closing, don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. Discover your metrics for how you will choose what information to toss and what to look further into. Be willing to change your viewpoint if you find something contrary to what you held as true, if and only if, it fits your metrics for truth.
Choose which sources to trust and why. Also, choose which sources are NOT trustworthy and let those go. Recognize this could change.
And finally, if we can honor what is the same between us, underneath the noise, we may find just a little of the safety we are craving in this wild time we are in.
I love you all. Lets keep it real and keep it civil!
