Is it still disinformation if the speaker believes it's true?

Bush's keynote at WIREC surpasses misinformation

Posted by Joseph Romm (Guest Contributor) at 1:36 PM on 07 Mar 2008

Read more about: George Bush | politics | energy

Scholars have been debating that question for ages, along with "If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around, does it make a sound?" and "Why don't we see any baby squirrels?" and "What the heck is happening on ABC's Lost?"

(BTW, if anyone actually knows what the heck is happening on Lost, how Sayid ends up being Ben's hitman (!), let me know -- I still believe the "island is purgatory" theory -- it certainly is for viewers -- even though it has been debunked by the show's creator. As if! I guess that makes me a Lost denier ... but I digress.)

Bushcatapult

I was inspired to re-examine this age-old question after the recent remarks of the Disinformer-in-Chief in his keynote address at the Washington International Renewable Energy Conference, a ministerial-level conference hosted by the U.S. government. He said:

Now, look, I understand stereotypes are hard to defeat. People get an image planted in their head, and sometimes it causes them not to listen to the facts. But America is in the lead when it comes to energy independence; we're in the lead when it comes to new technologies; we're in the lead when it comes to global climate change -- and we'll stay that way. [Applause.]

Side note: The "Is it still disinformation if the speaker gets applause?" question was actually settled by Aristotle himself in his little-known book The Duh of Rhetoric.

Now I do think that the president actually believes what he is saying, even though he has been no friend of renewables and even though the second sentence obviously applies better to him than anybody in his audience (perhaps than anybody who ever walked the Earth)? Indeed, if Bush were on the new reality show The Moment of Truth, strapped to a lie detector, I'm sure he'd break the bank.

If the speaker actually believes that the utter falsehoods he or she utters are true, then technically those words probably qualify as "misinformation." I am, however, here proposing Romm's Rule of Disinformation: Even when speakers believe the nonsense being spouted, misinformation becomes disinformation if it meets at least two of these four criteria:

The speakers ought to know that the words are false -- either because they and/or their advisors have been repeatedly informed of the truth or they could find out the truth in under 15 minutes using Google.
The words are not merely untrue but are in fact the opposite of the truth -- for instance, not only aren't we in "the lead when it comes to energy independence," we are arguably the biggest laggard in the world and we have become steadily less energy-independent by all measures under the policies of President Bush.
The speaker is following a well-established disinformation strategy -- in this case, not only is "We're in the lead when it comes to new technologies" the exact opposite of the truth (we have been falling farther behind Europe and Asia in clean technology development and deployment under Bush), but Bush is merely echoing for the umpteenth time the "technology, technology, technology, blah, blah" rhetoric recommended by master GOP disinformer Frank Luntz.
The words directly conflict with well-established science.

Bush's statement meets at least the first three criteria, so yes, it is disinformation. I would have said he also meets the fourth criterion, but his final clause is (or was) technically accurate:

... we're in the lead when it comes to global climate change.

Obviously, if he meant we're in the lead when it comes to solving global climate change, that would be contrary to well-established science, which says that in order to solve the climate problem, you need to decrease greenhouse gas emissions rather than increase them [note to self: in the future, avoid humor that is too dry].

But America is certainly in the lead when it comes to changing the global climate -- or at least we were the top emitter of GHGs for most of the Bush presidency. I can't fault Bush for not knowing China has probably surpassed us. In fact, I'm sure Bush never would have consciously let that happen.

Anyway, I hope this post proves useful to future philosophers and rhetoric/media scholars.

This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

For story: Is it still disinformation if the speaker believes it's true?
5 Comments | Post a Comment

one of my favorite lines from that speach

Now, all the countries we import from are friendly, stable countries; but some countries we get oil from don't particularly like us.

by Sir Oolius at 1:40 PM on 07 Mar 2008

Bush breathes lies like a fish breathes water

It's the very medium that he swims in and is no more apparent to him than the air around you(PRC residents excepted) is to you. That is precisely why he is the acting figurehead of the GOP. The last public person who had this peculiar talent was Ronald Reagun but he also had Alzheimers so it doesn't count as much.

I'm an agnostic but my only temptation to religion is the hope that someday people like him are held accountable for their actions by a higher power. If only George W. Bush could feel, in real time, the pain, despair and frustration he has, and will cause, literally billions of people.

The worst of his lies involve the denial and delay of action on climate change. That has put billions of people at risk.

Put the Carbon Back

by Pangolin at 3:25 PM on 07 Mar 2008

Bush is not alone

Look. Everybody believes that what they believe is true. Even if in some objective sense what they believe is false. This observation has been used to explain why young men can sincerely think they love a young woman in the true love sense, when in fact they are really just trying to procreate. A fellow can tell the girl that he loves her (and respects her) with great conviction because he sincerely (at that moment) believes it himself. We lie to ourselves all the time. Our brains are wired this way for the good of the species. It makes telling stories possible.

So Bush may just be a victim of his own beliefs and we already know he is averse to actually learning anything that might go against any of those beliefs. Therein lies the key, however.

Unfortunately so it is with most people. I'd venture to say all people most of the time. We all have beliefs about the world and how it works. We believe those beliefs are based on reality and evidence. But the real reality is we are a priori biased when it comes to paying attention to evidence that supports our beliefs and ignoring evidence that doesn't. How do you know the truth?

For my part I have found myself to be wrong in some cherished beliefs even in matters based on scientific knowledge. These days I question everything.

George
http://www.questioneverything.typepad.com/

George Mobus, Associate Professor, Institute of Technology, University of Washington Tacoma, and Professional Student for Life

by gmobus at 11:24 AM on 09 Mar 2008

George: good advice...

NPR's Radiolab had a good show about lying and self-deception recently. Here is a couple of snippets:

"She tells us that pathological liars have a surprising advantage over normal people: they are better at making connections between ideas in different parts of their brain."

"Psychologist Joanna Starek tells us that swimmers who lie to themselves swim faster than those who do not. And we explore the power of self-deception to make us more successful, and happier, people. "

I'd also recommend the video of the Chomsky/Trivers interchange. Self-deception may be rooted in a biological strategy to intimidate competitors!

by Colin Wright at 12:00 PM on 09 Mar 2008

Man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards...

...the rest

Professor, thank you for interjecting a rare breath of fresh air into the miasma of personal attacks and vindictiveness that passes for political discussion these days. It's not that there is no such thing as an objective reality, but that what we make of the deluge of second-, third-, and fourth-hand information that we receive daily depends largely on what we are primed to believe, based on our world view and past experience.

However, if you receive any packages addressed from some of the denizens of this newsgroup, I would strongly advise that you contact your friendly local bomb squad. True believers just can't stand being told they may not be in possession of the One Truth.

Best wishes

by edarnold41 at 12:30 PM on 10 Mar 2008
[ Parent ]

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.