George Rebane
[This is the addended transcript of my regular KVMR commentary broadcast on 17 January 2018. A slightly edited version of the broadcast commentary appears here in the 20jan18 Union.]
We are now such a tragically polarized nation that almost all of us believe we are being misled through the various media. We believe that disinformation and ‘fake news’ make up the major fare we are exposed to, and its source is, of course, from the other side. Observing this growing socio-political crisis over the recent years, the well-respected and non-partisan Rand Corporation has launched a research program to discover the nature, extent, causes, and possible solutions to what it calls ‘Truth Decay’. They recently published a report, actually a 326-page book, that describes the problem along with an outline for future research.
The Rand authors, Jennifer Kavanagh and Michael Rich, start by giving a working definition of Truth Decay. Its four dominant trends are –
1. increasing disagreement about facts and analytical interpretations of facts and data;
2. a blurring of the line between opinion and fact;
3. the increasing relative volume, and resulting influence, of opinion and personal experience over fact;
4. declining trust in formerly respected sources of factual information.
One of the prime causes of Truth Decay is in the confusing of personal opinions and anecdotal experiences with relevant facts. And today these reports issue from an explosion of sources ranging from government agencies, through the various network, cable, and online news outlets, to the social media dominated by Facebook and Twitter.
Another identified Truth Decay contribution is from our schools that have not been up to the task of turning out enough people with the knowledge and critical thinking skills needed to filter and make sense of the flood of data, information, and opinions that constantly wash over us.
People defend against such uncertainty, and gain some measure of comfort by becoming insular. They develop habits of communicating only with sources and parties that confirm their biases and share their worldviews or ontologies. Because they start with widely varying premises which are seldom brought into the discussion, the polarized populations more often than not reason within different logical developments that to the other side seem to be literally insane.
And then, of course, the world is full of agents and agencies with the intent to mislead their audiences. Governments, including the United States, have become expert at using different information channels to influence what other countries’ populations believe, how they vote, and conduct business. The Rand report also points out that today’s goings on in misinformation are not new. In the US we have had three notable periods during which Truth Decay was rampant – the late 19th century, the roaring 20s and the Great Depression, and during the social turmoil of 1960s and 70s.
While this work is both important and timely, I do believe the authors have missed a critical factor that drives today’s Truth Decay, and thereby constrains the available solutions. And that is the diametrically opposite organizations of society that our polarized fellow Americans seek. These are the opposing futures that substantiate for each their overarching and sincere belief of how to maximize the blessings of civil society. Moreover, each cohort believes that yielding to the other’s goal will initiate another Dark Age of Man which must be avoided at all costs. In this context promoting Truth Decay is an acceptable burden to bear or weapon to use if it will confirm your beliefs and enable your desired future.
I urge you to read the report, or at least its opening summary (here). In these commentaries I intend to update the progress of the Rand Corporation researchers.
My name is Rebane, and I also expand on this and related themes on Rebane’s Ruminations where the addended transcript of this commentary is posted with relevant links, and where such issues are debated extensively. However, my views are not necessarily shared by KVMR. Thank you for listening.
[Addendum] Regular RR readers will recognize that the Rand research corroborates Rebane Doctrine’s longstanding basic premises about journalism, the media, our educational systems, and the nature of the national consumers of news.
One of the report’s highlights is how anecdotal reports/stories are injected into news reports (and RR comment streams) as implied proxies for synoptic and/or aggregate data to support agenda-driven narratives. Another is the ongoing demise of basic arguments using facts and reason, instead of one’s feelings and experience as I recently reported (here) that is happening on campuses across the country. When discussing issues, the little snowflakes must not be stressed by having to deal with reason and countervailing facts that may bruise their fragile beliefs and invalidate their experiences.
A catastrophic statistic may be that most younger Americans (and certainly the Millennials) embrace world views that are grounded in some form of a collectivist ontology. These indoctrinations began at an early age in leftwing union dominated public schools, and today continue into and are nailed to their receptive psyches in the nation’s ivy-covered halls. A good test you can try ‘at home’ is to see how easy it is to elicit from them some form of ‘There’s nothing you can say that will convince me that …’. In short, these individuals sport calcified intellects that not only disqualify them as Bayesians, but also cause them to reject Lord Keynes’ famous retort about how to reasonably respond to the receipt of new data/information.
Another interesting observation about the Rand report is that the authors explicitly consider all cable news as doubtful until vetted. But they endorse network news as still delivering the real deal, that by implication should be respectfully received and believed – i.e. its version of truth shows no decay. (See Dr Kavanagh’s response to this in the 23jan18 update below.) Another more relevant critique, germane to their analysis of reported ‘information’ and ‘data’, is to understand that these two terms have distinct meanings which are not interchangeable. Data are facts and beliefs about the real world. Information is data formatted to support (specific) decisions. Ergo, from one dataset one can generate multiple sets of information. Explicating this distinction will pay many dividends in Rand’s subsequent research.
Finally, here is a figure, pilfered from the report, that does a good job of tying together the factors comprising “Truth Decay as a System.”
[23jan18 – Correspondence] In a cordial exchange of emails over recent days with lead author Dr Jennifer Kavanagh, she informed me that my observation re their reporting on the relative reliability of cable vs broadcast media news was in error. Dr Kavanagh wrote –
We would like to clarify one point: In the transcript of your radio commentary, you noted that “Another interesting observation about the Rand report is that the authors explicitly consider all cable news as doubtful until vetted. But they endorse network news as still delivering the real deal, that by implication should be respectfully received and believed – i.e. its version of truth shows no decay.”
That is not correct. We did not write nor mean to imply that cable news is any more affected by Truth Decay than network news. Instead, our intended point was that all sources of media—social media, print, radio, network television, and cable news—increasingly demonstrate blurring of the line between opinion and fact and an increase in the time devoted to commentary rather than fact. The rise of cable news did increase the number and diversity of outlets, but network television is just as susceptible to the problems that we identify and just as much an agent of Truth Decay as cable television, in our view.
(The quoted remark is actually contained only in the above addendum, is not part of the transcript, and was not included in the KVMR broadcast nor the column in The Union.) In response I gave her the basis for my observation in the form of ten annotated extracts from the report with the following preamble –
The conclusion that you favored today’s broadcast media over cable news is based on the following extracts from your report to which I have appended bracketed comments about what I believe a careful reader would most likely apprehend from each individually, and most certainly when taken as an ensemble of your and Dr Rich’s findings (interpretations?).
Dr Kavanagh’s response then further clarified what she and co-author Dr Rich intended to communicate –
As to the quotes from the report that you cite below, we call out cable news and social media as two of the areas where the trends that we define as part of Truth Decay are most prevalent. By not explicitly referencing broadcast media we did not mean to suggest that it does not contribute to Truth Decay’s trends in certain ways. In fact, we argue in the report that all media sources contribute to Truth Decay by blurring the line between fact and opinion and allowing opinion and anecdote to overwhelm facts in certain contexts.
I hope that sharing the above exchange will correct any takeaway from the report that departs from the authors’ conclusions re truth decay in cable and broadcast news media.
[21jan18 update] Linda Campbell, “a retired High School HIstory and Government teacher”, posted these two comments under my Other Voices column on The Union’s website. They are reproduced here as they appear online – H/T to reader who pointed me to these outpourings. From her thinking and writing skills it is difficult to tell that what follows is the work product of a classroom teacher of the kind that taught most of us. But her response is posted here as one more confirmation of the national critique of our public educational system, especially as it pertains to the quality of its teachers. No one can do a better job of exposing what has gone on in our classrooms for the last couple of generations than an angry and hubristic classroom teacher who was actually there and now defends her and her colleagues’ careers. One can only imagine the kind of history and government her students were taught. Here is Exhibit A in the lady’s own words.
[Comment #1]
Wow, cannot believe the sheer willfull arrogance of either ignorance or pure entitled, of one who historically, relying on rumour and heresy or just pure gossip, has been one of the main attack dogs of our local band of rhe White Wing Extremist Republicans, who viciously through slander and libel (thanks Union) defame anyone who stands up to thier campaign of hate, bigotry, and white skin entiitlement, and points out the reality of the real misson of these True Believer (Mr. Steele;s self proclaimed title) or take America back to the Articles of Confederation, The same old tired arguement of State’s Rights that the South used for when they seceeded from the Union. This current battle to Make America White again, is based on the same principles that the South wanted to retain thier particular brand of cheap labor , or the right to keep their historical sign of wealth, owning other people. My relative, Pierce Butler of South Carolina, was sent to the Second Constitutional Congress, (which was to create a more unifed or federal Government by writing the Consititution, contrary to Mr,Rebane’s opinion based history) as the largest slave owner to argue for that right. Unfortunately for him, he agreed to compromise at 3/5, and his fellow Slave Owner were not happy, In thier opinion, it was just a slippery slope to the Unacceptable..Yep, I can claim, my ancestor created the slippery slope crap….
THE REAL TRUTH based on factual or credible evidence, George, Bill and the rest of gang, have been edcuated and trained that the only source for the truth is FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, Jeff Jones, NRA, ect and just recently discovered National Enquierer. If, I hadn’t been exposed for years to Mr; Rebanes inane practice of disgusing opinions through cherry picking facts, I would of thought, he was being satirical.. I would say, Dr. heal thyself, but upon my own research of his Doctorate, I couldn’t find any proof of UCLA ,in the 1970’s offering Doctorates in Computer anything but .could be wrong.
Yes, Mr, Rebane , Rand Study was correct, but you and your buddies of Alternative Facts guiding your Atl -Rights opinions, are suffering from total decay of ethics, principles, compassion, and common decency trying to force your Anti Constitutional White Wing Extremist Republican Politcial or Personal Agendas on, WE THE PEOPLE, The real sick thing is that you and fellow gang members have covered yourselves up in Flags and Red, White and Blue claimed to be Patriots, and used the Consitution as toilet paper, to wip your arrogant, bigotted, entitled white asses, all in order to make America White again, Apparently you, Mr Steele and the rest of your whiteskinned bigots, think the rest of us are stupid. But my question has and is, Why the Union caters these white wing extremist to spread and thier campaign of anger, intolerance and hate on the rest of us..
.. Ps George, I am a retired High School HIstory and Government teacher, and it was a standard for us to educate students in objective reasoning skills or Critical thinking skills. It was your Crowd, who hated that, you people called it liberal brainwashing; But as usual, according to your bible, Non Dare Call it Treason (1958), public education and Teachers are the number one enemy of your fantasy Republic.
.Its called Politics, which by definition is a BULLY behavior. In conclusion, based on your own words and actions, you have defined yourself, as narrow minded,entitled, white skinned bigot who believes that he has the right to impose his opinions on the rest of us.
Georgie poo , bottom line, you and your fellow True Believers (of What?) are nothing but a bunch of aging bully bigoted hypocrites, and as we all know bully’s are cowards. thats why they run in packs., Unfortunately for you, your pack is getting smaller by the day. In my opinion, Good Riddance, tired of you ol dogs yapping and whining about a past that never existed. Didn’t you learn in your Academic Career,you can’t recreat the past, you can only learn from it… .Its obvious that you have no clue what Critical or Objective Reasoning skills are, but I can tell you, its not based on the opinions or thoughts in your brain..that is called subjective reasoning or using the Rand Study as means to support your own bigoted white wing ideology….The complete opposite of Objectivity, or based on factual statements not opinion
Objective reasoning is required to obtain Compassion, something you,Steele, and the rest of your pack of dogs lack/ All of you are nothing but a bunch of.bitter old selfish dogs lying in their mangers. You will take food and Health care from babies and poor children of all skin colors. because your are scared that your subsidized, tax welfare, entitlement (Paul Ryan’s words) Medicare will be reduced in order to cover your needs.. THAT IS THE TRUTH!
[Comment #2]
FYI For all of you self educated. genius’s of all the “Right”knowledge’, I humbly ask you to review the following:The Difference between Factual Statement and a Opinion Statement. This was a standard introductory lesson, no matter what Social Science Class I taught. I would practice this basic critical thinking skil by doing Current Events every Friday..Google search revealed many different, brief, good, lessons that would help you relearn this skill, that your read in the Rand Report. It appears from the comments below, as one who has a Master’s In Education;Adminstrative Services, CSU,Chico, that the last time you were involved in public education, was when you yourselves were students. This is demonstrated by the fact that most of your statements were of the opinion variety, not the factual. Please do the above and fact check my statements..
Oh, here’s a piece of data based on expert reports, not newspapers, California has a 80 per cent graduation rate despite being 41 in the nation in(9000) per pupil spending. But Good News Ca is number One in per prison inmate, 65,000.00 per year. Those are real deal numbers. In my opinion, one can tell ones or a society’s priorities by where they put their money and time towards and as such I think as a taxpayer and a citizen, that stinks..
rebanesruminations.com 
Leave a comment