Popping back on briefly to share some insights on media consumption, spread of conspiracy theories, & epistemelogical divides.

.@n_d_anderson & I have spent the last few days having important conversations w/ family members who fall in the evangelical right matrix.
We didn't talk presenting issues & aimed our Qs instead for the underlying divides. @DavidAFrench identified this in a recent article as the difference btwn the danger of believing activating lies & enabling lies.
A couple things became apparent very quickly:

1) We had to be the ones to insist on conversation. People are afraid of conversation right now b/c they think it will turn into a fight & they don't want that w/ people they love. Meanwhile, the epistemological divides widen.
2) We had to clarify the underlying disconnects--and they aren't simply at a policy or issue level. Unfortunately, people have been trained to see positions or votes as representative of certain things that don't necessarily represent. But this leads to biggest takeaway...
3) The biggest assumption we unearthed was consistently about media consumption & influence. Folks assumed we reached our conclusions b/c we were unduly influenced by liberal news sources. But wait, there's more... & this is really important...
It became clear to me that the difference btwn us was not the source of our news but HOW we were using the internet & social media.
Did we use the internet to gain access prepackaged information or did we use the internet to gain access to direct sources? Did we "watch" social media or did we "read" social media?
Here's how it happened:

I ask this Q: "What do you think I think & why do you think I think that?"

Answer: "You're doing your best, but you're influenced by liberal news media that doesn't report the facts fairly."
In their mind, there are 2 choices: prepacked info that skews right & prepackaged info that skews left.

They didn't have category for ability to bypass reporters & news outlets all together. They didn't understand I can factcheck by simply going to source's socials.
(And let it need to be stated explicitly, conspiracy theories are the essence of prepackaged information. They are connecting the dots btwn disparate bits of info & delivering it to consumer. The power of the conspiracy theory is not the data; it's the connections they draw.)
Despite the claims, the digital age has actually weakened the possibility of journalistic bias. It has created GREATER accountability for those reporting the news to us b/c if we want, we can access public figures more directly.
OTOH, the digital age has created unique pitfalls for those accustomed to "watching" the news (vs. engaging w/ it). The digital age puts more weight on individual to "interpret" & sort thru news.
And for a lot of folks, that's simply too much. There is simply too much information. They are legitimately overwhelmed & don't have the skills, time, or capacity to make sense of it. SO they outsource it. They outsource the process of critical thinking.
But the news sources they choose are doing more than providing facts. They are providing cohesion; they are providing a narrative.

That's why they think I'm unduly influenced by liberal bias. B/c they have outsourced process of drawing conclusions, they believe I have as well.
I'm not saying this excuses lack of curiousity, fact-checking, or intellectual honesty. I'm saying it was helpful to understand how we can both have access to similar sources & come to different conclusions. We're using digital age differently & to different purposes.
I know a lot of you are trying to understand the massive gaps in info right now. To do this, you're going to have to get to the roots. You're going to have to unearth deeply held assumptions. You're going to have to ask direct, probing questions.
For me, these 3 Qs have been productive:

1) What do you think I think?
2) Why do you think I think that?
3) How do you square that w/ everything else you know about me?
And (I can't reiterate this enough), you are going to have to be the one to gently insist on these conversations. Yes, folks should be intellectually curious & care about you. Yes, they should have mental flexibility to entertain alternative viewpoints instead of condemning.
But this whole crisis has been brought about by the FAILURE to do these things. This whole crisis has been brought about by dividing & conquering & condeming those who diverge in their thinking. That's not suddenly going to change.
Political radicalization, by definition, will not seek out these conversations & will instead, enable & reward the kind of vitriole & aggressive rhetoric that has brought us to this point.
And to be clear, I am not talking about "understanding" people or having empathy for their positions. I am not suggesting that we bridge divides by minimizing the differences btwn us. On the contrary, we must pursue conversations that unearth & bring real differences to light.

More from Society

The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.

View the resolutions and voting results here:

The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.

Israel and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr


The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.

Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab


The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF


The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW

You May Also Like

🌺कैसे बने गरुड़ भगवान विष्णु के वाहन और क्यों दो भागों में फटी होती है नागों की जिह्वा🌺

महर्षि कश्यप की तेरह पत्नियां थीं।लेकिन विनता व कद्रु नामक अपनी दो पत्नियों से उन्हे विशेष लगाव था।एक दिन महर्षि आनन्दभाव में बैठे थे कि तभी वे दोनों उनके समीप आकर उनके पैर दबाने लगी।


प्रसन्न होकर महर्षि कश्यप बोले,"मुझे तुम दोनों से विशेष लगाव है, इसलिए यदि तुम्हारी कोई विशेष इच्छा हो तो मुझे बताओ। मैं उसे अवश्य पूरा करूंगा ।"

कद्रू बोली,"स्वामी! मेरी इच्छा है कि मैं हज़ार पुत्रों की मां बनूंगी।"
विनता बोली,"स्वामी! मुझे केवल एक पुत्र की मां बनना है जो इतना बलवान हो की कद्रू के हज़ार पुत्रों पर भारी पड़े।"
महर्षि बोले,"शीघ्र ही मैं यज्ञ करूंगा और यज्ञ के उपरांत तुम दोनो की इच्छाएं अवश्य पूर्ण होंगी"।


महर्षि ने यज्ञ किया,विनता व कद्रू को आशीर्वाद देकर तपस्या करने चले गए। कुछ काल पश्चात कद्रू ने हज़ार अंडों से काले सर्पों को जन्म दिया व विनता ने एक अंडे से तेजस्वी बालक को जन्म दिया जिसका नाम गरूड़ रखा।जैसे जैसे समय बीता गरुड़ बलवान होता गया और कद्रू के पुत्रों पर भारी पड़ने लगा


परिणामस्वरूप दिन प्रतिदिन कद्रू व विनता के सम्बंधों में कटुता बढ़ती गयी।एकदिन जब दोनो भ्रमण कर रहीं थी तब कद्रू ने दूर खड़े सफेद घोड़े को देख कर कहा,"बता सकती हो विनता!दूर खड़ा वो घोड़ा किस रंग का है?"
विनता बोली,"सफेद रंग का"।
तो कद्रू बोली,"शर्त लगाती हो? इसकी पूँछ तो काली है"।
Trump is gonna let the Mueller investigation end all on it's own. It's obvious. All the hysteria of the past 2 weeks about his supposed impending firing of Mueller was a distraction. He was never going to fire Mueller and he's not going to


Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.

Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.

Mueller's team was 100% partisan.

That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election

They looked high.

They looked low.

They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.

And they found...NOTHING.

Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.

What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?

THERE WEREN'T ANY.

Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.