Have you ever wondered why it’s so hard to get people to admit they’re wrong? Why when you’re having an argument with someone, and refute their every point with facts and evidence they will still refuse to admit their beliefs are false? I’ll tell you why: facts don’t change our minds one bit. As humans we like to think our existence is based on reason and logical thinking, but this is simply not true. Neuroscientists have known the power of the anchoring heuristic for decades, and there have been dozens upon dozens of studies that corroborate this idea that we resist facts. The why is complicated and has to do primarily with humans evolving to maintain social cohesion and snuff out any “troublemakers.” The net effect, however, is that once a percept is formed, it is extremely difficult to change. In fact, when evidence is provided that contradicts our beliefs a backlash effect has been documented, where people become even more resistant, or even hostile. This has become especially poignant recently in relation to politics, where people engage in heated arguments about differing political ideologies, tearing apart families at dinner tables on Thanksgiving and Christmas across America.
Beyond family squabbles, however, this can have far greater and more insidious effects. For example, what happens when a propaganda machine with a huge influence distributes lies as new information or breaking news? Or even worse, what happens when someone with hundreds of thousands of followers’ posts satire material as a joke and people actually believe it? This is exactly what Christopher Blair is doing on his Facebook page. He believes he is catching his intended audience looking like fools, but all he is doing is radicalizing them. The followers of his page integrate this new information he puts out as fact, regardless of how ridiculous it may seem because it aligns with their anchored views, merely feeding their conformation bias as a result. And he believes of his “gotcha” moments where he reveals the falsity of his post, he is making people understand the error of their ways. Let me tell you a secret: he isn’t. Regardless of how many facts he provides about how Chelsea Clinton wasn’t even at the White House that that day, the damage is done. So I ask you, are his jokes, his messing with people many of us like to poke fun at, still funny?
I wholeheartedly agree with your point of the hypocrisy behind Christopher Blair's actions. He claims a moral stance yet makes money without changing the overall situation (besides getting a few people with him to vent their anger). I think that displayed a lot of critical insight into understanding that Blair's actions have not achieved much beyond increasing people's misunderstandings.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I believe that your writing style can be made easier to digest if you broke down your narration and explanation into more paragraphs. Directing your viewers would be easier and they can get a breath of fresh air.
Lastly, I think that your argument could have been made stronger by quoting real-time statistics about America's Last Line of Defence. Beyond just mentioning that more people are getting hoodwinked unintentionally, showing raw data would be an effective way of demonstrating your point.
This was extremely well written, especially your opening claims on how "facts don't change our minds one bit." Some things I suggest doing is citing the studies you talk about that corroborate your claims. I feel this would help strengthen your arguments and help drive your point home. One formatting suggestion I have is to make your font size slightly bigger as it would make it easier to read. The last suggestion I have is to add more meaningful connections from class readings to your blog post which would additionally help strengthen your blog post. Overall, it was an enjoyable read!
ReplyDeleteI find the idea that humans are influenced by these posts to such a great extent interesting. You should look into how memes have become a powerful tool of political persuasion from mass replication of ideas. These seemingly harmless online jokes have turned into weapons that can be used against political and economic opponents.
ReplyDeleteYour blog post was very well written, from your opening argument to your ending where you leave the reader to digest what they read and come up with their own opinion. Your argument is very convincing as well. I completely agree with the points you made and argue that Blair knew exactly what he was doing. I would add the citations to the research studies that you allude to in the first paragraph.
ReplyDeleteThe title of your post is interesting and engages the reader by having them think about the question. I think the addition of the picture in your post really adds to the topic you are discussing. One thing you might wanna think about is having your post center more around the readings rather than bringing it in at the very end.
ReplyDeleteI think you have offered a lot of unique insights on a lot of points. Your post really grabbed my attention with the first sentence. I feel like there is a slight disconnect between the first paragraph and the second paragraph. Offering a bit more of a connection between your two points would help meld the two arguments together and make for a more cohesive blog post.
ReplyDelete