General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy People Share Conspiracy Theories Even When They Know They Are Untrue
Link to tweet
Jay Van Bavel
@jayvanbavel
40% of people admitted they would be willing to share conspiracy theories that they know to be untrue.
Why?
Because they want to share information that will boost their social engagement. You cant fix misinformation if you ignore social motives.
Why People Share Conspiracy Theories Even When They Know They Are Untrue
Social motives for sharing conspiracy theories.
psychologytoday.com
8:01 AM · Sep 25, 2021
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/norms-and-behavior-change/202109/why-people-share-conspiracy-theories-even-when-they-know-they
Social media often confronts users with difficult choices: sharing unverified content that would generate social engagement, or sharing content that they know is more likely to be true but is less likely to be liked. Put differently, the decision to share conspiracy theories for many people reflects a calculated trade-off.
The spread of conspiracy theories has significantly limited our ability to deal with crises, from addressing climate change to fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. More than 70 million Americans who are eligible for a vaccine have chosen not to get one and approximately half of these people have misinformed beliefs, such as the belief that the government is using vaccine injections to insert microchips into people.
Beyond Beliefs
A growing body of work has begun to advance our understanding of why people believe in conspiracy theories. This work has found that people who feel like they lack control over events, and who dislike uncertainty and ambiguity are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories.
Many questions remain, however, with respect to why people share conspiracy theories. Although early work presumed that people on social media share content that they believe, our new research reveals that people are often willing to share conspiracy theories that they know to be false. In fact, we found that 40 percent of participants admitted that they would be willing to share conspiracy theories that they know to be untrue.
Why?
*snip*
Arkansas Granny
(31,484 posts)brooklynite
(93,880 posts)...because I don't care if people like my social media presence or not. I post what I know and what I think and am followed by people who like it that way.
keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)So harsh!
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)can do better.
keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)In what way are they disabled to you?
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)borders on the exploitative, and it's well-documented.
https://publicdelivery.org/roger-ballen-twins/
He said:
I was staying on a game farm with my wife and children. I drove to the town to buy something and saw Casie working in a garden. I got out of the car and greeted him. I didnt know how much he understood. He couldnt talk too well, so I asked his mother for permission and got him to stand against a wall so I could photograph him. Suddenly, I became aware of a shadow. I turned and saw his brother. It was amazing, such a strong figure.
But the family reported a different account of the events. According to the family, the twins mother never met with Roger Ballen, nor did she give him permission to take his sons photograph. The family reported that the mother of the two boys was hurt and saddened by how her sons were portrayed in the book that was seen by an entire world.
It is hard to understand which side speaks the truth. The twins, however, are said to be happy all the time, perhaps not knowing that they became a center of attention in the entire world.
(snip)
The twins, only identified as Casie and Driesie, were put in a home for mentally challenged individuals in a small center in North West South Africa. Casie and Driesie were born in a place called Outjo, present-day Namibia, but moved to Wolmaransstad alongside their mother. They later returned to Namibia after their mother died and stayed with their brother and his wife. Then they were put in the nursing home because their relatives could not provide proper attention as the twins needed special care.
Here they are in 2011, as documented by Herman Verwey:
These are people used as a punchline all over the internet and it's heartbreaking.
keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)OK. I'm surprised you knew that.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=are+mentally+challenged+people+disabled
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)And I'm not sure what you mean by your link.
keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)I can't explain it to you if you don't click on it to see that it supports your premise.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)hands to pick up a glass! Amazing!
keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)Trump is objectionable because of his views and policies, not the way he holds a glass.
keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)So a y/n answer is not as important to you as you pretended a few posts ago.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)though.
keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)The doc said I could have alcohol or a liver.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)Good stuff or efficiency?
I used to like Anisette. All it needed was an ice cube.
Finished my last bottle years ago and started the meds the next day.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)Not a fan of anise, but I am sorry to hear your meds deprive you of a pleasure you enjoyed.
Piasladic
(1,160 posts)I guess you're richer than I am. I have one empty, blue bottle in the garage. I am embarrassed I bought it. Husband called me out, and I still cringe. It was better than Seagram's.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)good news today, so I figure it was good enough reason to bring out the blue bottle.
Piasladic
(1,160 posts)Do tell.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)Piasladic
(1,160 posts)You're aces in my book.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)Piasladic
(1,160 posts)They look so happy. Twins for life I guess. Good for them.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,153 posts)It's used a lot and it's shitty. There's a lot to talk about when it comes to art, perception/reality, autonomy, the other, and so on, but...using their photo in a meme making fun of people who don't want to get vaccinated is just cheap, lazy and offensive.
Silent3
(15,020 posts)I've occasionally done that myself, but always in a derisive manner, and linking to criticism and description of the conspiracy, not to advocacy for it.
Nevilledog
(50,687 posts)Debunking conspiracy theories is a good thing.
LeftInTX
(24,560 posts)Takket
(21,425 posts)people would rather be socially accepted by their group than correct.
Sympthsical
(8,936 posts)Literally none. One person made a speculative assertion based on a single standalone fact. Others went, "Huh, yeah, I bet that one detail explains fifty other things we have no evidence for!"
And it was off to the races.
It is very much about engagement. "Look at me, guys! I believe this, too! Accept me into the community of believers! I contribute!"
I think that's why I never get roped into 99% of the stuff. I don't care about being included in a group or if a stranger on the internet likes me. I have family and friends. Why would I need Twitter acceptance and validation? It's empty and conditional.
My social media activity can be broken down into four categories: 1) Bored. 2) Testing an idea or theory out. 3) Trying to find a better articulation through writing of a thought or idea in my head I'm having trouble making cohere. 4) Bored and just making conversation about nothing important.
I think being in a master's program for psychology also changes things. I am now always reading something and going, "Where's the cite?" in my head. It's almost maddening. Can't even read run of the mill news articles anymore without editing them in my head. "Cite your work! You just asserted something with no source or evidence! You are a terrible journalist!"
All day, everyday.
gulliver
(13,142 posts)They're not theories. They're phony pretexts for wrong actions these people want to take or have taken, for false words they want to speak or have spoken. We keep calling them "conspiracy theorists," but that's wrong in most of their cases. It lets them off the moral hook. "Conspiracy theorist" implies crazy or dumb, not the truth that most of these people are moral actors deliberately using half-believed pretexts to do wrong.
no_hypocrisy
(45,786 posts)littlemissmartypants
(22,418 posts)It's a real eye opener. For example, misinformation, according to the documentary, travels six times faster than the truth.
I highly recommend it.
❤
keithbvadu2
(36,371 posts)kairos12
(12,817 posts)I have always explained my sock disappearances on the intersection of certain Zodiac events.
Now, it's out of control. I'm going to start reaching out to preppers.