General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFear, Uncertainty, and Doubt - Recognizing FUD Online
One of the most common tools used by propagandists and disrupters is FUD. By telling half-truths and only revealing the negative side of an issue, some people often resort to spreading FUD as their principal tactic. FUD is all over the Internet. Bloggers, Op-Ed writers, and even people whose names you recognize spread FUD. It knows no political boundaries, and is used by all sides. Here are some ways to recognize it:
1. The information is based on unreleased material, or "closely-held secrets" but pretends to tell you what the material will reveal.
2. Information is presented with unidentified sources. This can take many forms, like "We hear, some say, sources reveal" and that kind of thing. If no source is named, there is a very good chance that such a source doesn't actually exist or is self-referential.
3. Dire consequences of the thing that is predicted are stated as the primary content of the material.
4. The location where the material is found has a sketchy reputation or has previously used this technique, only to be found out later to be FUD.
5. The information is presented in a way that is designed to make you and others angry about what is predicted.
6. The information is dropped onto a location where it will be seen, but the person dropping it slinks away and does not participate in discussion.
7. When prior FUD by a source is revealed to be untrue, that source is nowhere to be found, but can be found dropping more FUD anyway.
8. Information that is FUD often refers to or links to other disseminaters of FUD. Often the same FUD will be found in those places, but not at more reliable sources. This is always said to be "because the other sources won't tell you the truth."
9. FUD almost always focuses on the negative. Nobody spreads good FUD. Only bad.
There are many other signs that information is FUD. After a while, you'll begin to recognize those signs as well.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)MineralMan
(146,333 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)MineralMan
(146,333 posts)EFerrari
(163,986 posts)TheWraith
(24,331 posts)People really need to exercise more caution on this subject. Despite the level of pride many express over their cynicism about the media, we're always eager to uncritically hear things that confirm our biases.
MineralMan
(146,333 posts)our current beliefs.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)In a real crisis, a real hero tries to calm you down, to tell you the facts, and to give you courage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood,_toil,_tears,_and_sweat
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5057/
Good job.
MineralMan
(146,333 posts)Thank you for that.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)It is for me to thank you here, this is a subject dear to my heart, and you have laid it out better than I ever did.
EFerrari
(163,986 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Evasporque
(2,133 posts)That is probably true...but I am here for the 10%... the other 10% is snark.. when you usually look at the outcome of FUD most usually it is recognized as a fucked up deal...
So FUD begets FUD...
MineralMan
(146,333 posts)solid information and accurate news. There is still a lot of FUD presented on DU, though, and not from any one direction.
tridim
(45,358 posts)They are masters at spreading FUD about Apple's competitors. Ask any machead how many times the average PC crashes in a year. The answer will be pure classic FUD.
MineralMan
(146,333 posts)And they enlist their users to spread it around. It's comical. In the meantime, the Apple users and Windows users are all just using their hardware and software, going merrily on their way. I won't even mention Linux, the evangelistic religion of the computer.