What could be a more relevant book for 2017 than one examining the phenomenon of post-truth. Claims that we have moved in our society into a post-truth era are all pervasive, and involve politics, economics, ethics, diplomacy, social media, advertising and more. In this short, easy-to-read paperback, Guardian journalist, and former editor of The Spectator, Matthew D'Ancona examines the issue and proposes a response.
Wading rather nimbly through current affairs and philosophy, and drawing on a wide range of sources, D'Ancona present a powerful, and deftly written perspective. The first thing he argues is that this is a genuine phenomena and not merely a groundless media frenzy surrounding the catchphrase. He really believes that industrial scale lying is affecting our society more significantly than we have previously known. Clearly it would be nonsense to argue that historically politicians always told the truth, but this book agrees that there is an acute truth crisis in our public debate today.
Secondly, D'Ancona examines the cultural context in which this problem has arises. While his discussion is broad, there are two main things to which he repeatedly returns; post-modernism and social media. His discussion of post-modernity leads him to suggest that the de-construction of certainty, of knowledge, institutions and sources of knowledge has moved beyond the reasonable rejection of undue deference, and into a collapse of any discernment. The post-modern trajectory to see any truth-claim as being a power-play, rather than having any basis in objective reality; might have removed some tyrannies; but created a far worse problem in its wake.
This deconstruction of the possibility of knowable truth, has been compounded by the development of the internet. Social media, and the complex algorithms which tailor content to the viewers preferences, places people in bubbles of self-confirming views - challenges to which are defined as conspiracies. So, despite the overwhelming medical evidence of the benefits of childhood immunisation, anti-vacc communities exist on online; decrying evidence as plot, and engaging in re-enforcing cycles of confirmation bias. But this is but one example. D'Ancona suggest that whatever the issue, most people exist in self-re-enforcing knowledge bubbles, rarely encountering information which differs from their preconceptions. As such, not only are vested interests currently more willing than ever to lie, but as a population we are more susceptible to manipulation than ever. 'Fake News' delivers results, even once the fakery has been exposed.
"Learning how to navigate the web with discernment is the most pressing cultural mission of our age." p114
Alongside Anti-vaccination activists, D'Ancona attacks politicians such as Trump who score particularly poorly when his utterances are 'fact checked'; The Brexit campaign with it's dodgy bus; believers in a metro-liberal elite with undue influence in society; and Holocaust deniers. That's quite a list; and a bit of a problem.
The problem lies here. The list of people and causes that D'Ancona sees as the fruit of post-truth and news-fakery seem to be anything to do with political positions with which he (and presumably his metro-liberal elite colleagues) disagree! Take the Brexit debate for example. I generally agree with his position, and voted to 'remain' in the EU. I also agree with him that the 'Leave' campaign had a more than flexible relationship with the truth. Boris has just been rebuked again by the Office for National Statistics for recycling the palpably false claims about the weekly contributions from the UK to the EU budget. Daniel Hannan said in the campaign, that it was simply a matter of the UK leaving the EU institutions, and that "no one is talking about leaving the single market." Of course, that's all anyone is actually interested in talking about now. However, as a remain voter, I'm also reminded that George Osborn said that a 'Leave' vote would result in a catastrophic emergency budget the next morning, which also turned out to be fake. Furthermore the Leave claim that Junkers was about to seek a common EU foreign policy and standing army turned out to be true; while their claim that Turkey were about to be granted member status was fake. Obviously there are thoughtful, principled people on both sides; but when a result is a close as this referendum was, perhaps only a few needed to be persuaded by fakery to swing the result. But D'Ancona only seems to focus on the Brexiteers post-truthiness, lumping it in together with a Trump-ish populism which rejects evidence in favour of feeling, and membership in self-affirming thought bubbles. His selection of post-truth fakers which reflect his political opponents, might suggest that as well as being an astute observer of post-truth; he is unwittingly also a casual participant.
A deeper question I suspect, lies unanswered beneath these causes and examples of post-truth which D'Ancona discusses. He hints at it on p112
"Our own Post-Truth era is a taste of what happens when a society abandons its defence of the values that underpin its cohesion, order and progress: the values of veracity, honesty and accountability."
According to writers as diverse as Vishal Mangalwadi, Alister McGrath and Nick Spencer, in our country, these very things have grown from a distinctly Christian set of beliefs and values. It is no great step to argue therefore that the secular project of the last fifty years has failed to adequately ground its aspirations for society in a base which can bear its demands. Just as the fruits of coherence grew from a plant with deep roots in Christian soil, perhaps post-Christian and post-modern society no longer has any fundamental commitment to truth, nor sense of accountability. The truism of historical research is that contemporary historians simply cannot imagine a world in which religious values influenced every sphere of life (that's why they do crass things like measure religiosity by church attendance, when a fallen Victorian drunk might sit in a gin palace using the Christian narrative to understand his predicament and point to his redemption). But I digress. Truth is a central concern of the Christian faith; the prohibition on lying in the 10 Commandments is but a starting point for an arc which culminates in the idea of Jesus Christ appearing on earth as truth incarnate; and that we are divinely accountable for every word we say. If you saturate a culture in such thinking for over a millennia, make it the basis for holding truth as objectively valuable; then strip away such thinking in under fifty years; then some diminution in veracity is perhaps inevitable. That of course is not to say that there are not countless people who are secular in their thought but perfectly decent in the actions. However, it is to say that there are such people who do not realise the roots of, and sources of, the moral universe they have so happily inhabited.
Finally, D'Ancona ends his book with a chapter on how to 'fight back' against fake news. Most of this is fair enough, and contains some useful thoughts in engaging the heart of the hearer along with the head. He notes the way in which the 'remain' campaign wrongly thought that the argument would be won by the sober repetition of economic forecasts, which turned out to be less effective than the appeal to heart to seize control, or cry freedom from Brexiteers. The Scottish Referendum campaign was characterised by significant differences on this score too, albeit with a different outcome.
Another comment worth making at this stage is that there is a role for each of us to fight back against fakery and post-truth in whatever context we find ourselves. Rejection of fake news which supports a cause in which are personally invested might be a significant step. Scare-mongering, lying and news-faking is objectionable, whether the cause is a good, bad or indifferent one. Having argued that the Christian faith is something which places truth-telling in high regard, for Christians we must make sure that our house, 'the church' is in order here. It is not enough for us to argue the historical/cultural apologetic, as I have here, if we are not prepared to call-out the fakers and fraudsters who lurk amongst us. So when phoney TV evangelists, snake-oil salesmen and prosperity preachers some peddling their wares we should collectively disown them as not being part of the Christian faith. Figures of church growth or decline should be objectively analysed and not handed to spin doctors, while any claims of divine healing should be critically examined by real doctors.
And if you want some advice on where the future lies. After reading D'Ancona, I'd suggest investing everything you have in establishing a fact-checking agency, with researchers, statisticians and analysts. In a future world in which information-overload will reach ever more unmanageable levels, enormous power and influence will lie with anyone who can gain a reputation as an unbiased, rigorous, incorruptible fact checker.
D'Ancona's Post Truth is far from being the last word on this essential subject, but it is a very good place to start thinking and open the discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment