How To Detect Fake News With Mojo

 How To Detect Fake News With Mojo

Dealing with fake news is a problem that can be alleviated if you are a high mojo person. To be sure, anyone can go to the internet and search for “ways to detect fake news”. The results are numerous and largely uniform. And, they are largely not helpful. See here or here. For example, the results might say:

1. The Source Is Known to Be Shady
2. Other Stories From This Source Are Incredulous
3. Reputable News Sites Aren't Carrying It
4. It Predicts a Future Disaster
5. It Reveals a Cure for a Major Illness
6. The Website Carries a Disclaimer
7. The Story Is a Little Too Funny or Interesting
8. A Poll is Featured
9. The Website Has an Odd Domain Name
10. The Story Makes You Angry

What is wrong with this advice? First of all, it primarily attacks the source and not the message (numbers 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, and 9). This is sometimes referred to as an ad hominem attack by debaters., who consider it illegitimate. There are good and bad sources and good and bad messages, They aren’t inherently related. Shady sources might publish true stories and might have published many false stories. These truisms have little to do with the reliability of a given message. Nor is it relevant that other “reputable” sites aren’t writing about it (3).

Is anything indicated about the current message that a website carries a disclaimer (6) or features a poll (8) or has an odd domain name (9)? Or that it writes interesting or funny stories (7)? These are, again, attacks on the messenger, not the message.

Future disasters have occurred. Does that mean that anyone who predicted one was wrong (4)? Of course not. Major illnesses have been cured. Does that mean that anyone who predicted it was wrong (5)? Again, of course not.

Now let’s consider the tenth item, a story makes you angry. At least this is not a direct attack on the messenger. However, it still misses the mark. It is directed at the recipient, not the message. There have been many true stories that made me angry (and some false ones). Due to my inherent cynicism, there have also been true and false stories that didn’t. If a story makes you angry, that doesn’t mean it is false.

There is a different way to judge stories. Lets’s look at a bunch using this method. Here they are:

1. Elizabeth Warren endorsed Bernie Sanders
2. Jake Maccoby, a former speech writer for the Obama Justice Department, wrote on Twitter that Trump had “told people to drink bleach.”
3. The CIA secretly gave LSD to unsuspecting individuals to test mind control.
4. Trump is removing mailboxes.
5. Twenty-eight black men died of (treatable) syphilis in the name of science.
6. Trup Is Now Trying To Get Mike Pence Impeached
7. Tobacco companies hid evidence that smoking is deadly.
8. Pope Francis Endorses Donald Trump
9. The FBI spied on John Lennon.

Here is the alternative method. First, you have to decide if the story plausible? All of the above odd numbered stories are plausible. They could have happened. That doesn’t mean they did, but it is a start. That means that the even numbered stories are not plausible and can be considered to be fake news. If you aren’t sure, consult a trusted friend. 

Let’s look at each one, even first. 

2. It has often been reported that people die after drinking bleach. It has been used as a murder weapon and a suicide weapon. Would the leader of the free world actually tell people to drink bleach? I, for one, think this is preposterous.

4. Is it plausible to steal mailboxes? Wouldn’t it be obvious if the mailbox story was happening? Could a secret like this be kept given the number of people who would have to be involved. Obviously, it can’t be done by a small group. What about leaks? Counterefforts? Sabotage? What about alternative explanations? “On average, from 2010 through 2019, the Postal Service reports it removed 3,258 drop boxes a year”, says USA Today. There are good reasons to retire mailboxes. What is the replacement rate? Is the net removal rate enough to make a difference in an election? 

6 Why would a Vice President who is often praised effusively in public and given important responsibility warrant impeachment, particularly from the person who likes him? If he wasn’t performing or couldn’t help the ticket, aren’t there simpler ways of hiding him or replacing him?

8. Clergymen are assiduous in their efforts not to be political in their pronouncements. Listen to any sermon and you will hear the care with which the preacher avoids taking a stance to one side. Every frequent church-goer is used to the sermonizer’s notorious reticence. Sermonizers have historically endured withering criticism to maintain it. Why would Pope Francis break this tradition?

Now consider the rest.

1. Elizabeth Warren endorsed Bernie Sanders. This is plausible but there is no evidence that it ever happened. Politicians often endorse their one-time opponents. In fact, there are many stories from both sies of the aisle that urged Warren to make such an endorsement. Maybe because of the sheer number, people assumed that the endorsement happened. It didn’t.

3 The CIA has tested many drugs and given them to people surreptitiously. THere is an interest on mind control. This is plausible. Let’s look at the second criterion. What is the evidence? In this case, a FOIA request yielded a document that says the CIA did this to unsuspecting individuals. Enough said . This is true.

5. There was a time in this country when the lives of black men were not as valued as they are today. There was a great desire to know the effects of syphilis. Put these two things together and you have a plausible story. This was revealed in the Belmont Report. Wikipedia contains an article about it called the “Tuskegee Syphilis Study.” It led to reforms in the Public Health Service and an apology from President Bill Clinton.

7. Is there anyone who doesn’t agree that smoking is dangerous to human health? This is enough to make a cancer claim plausible. Further evidence comes from a UCLA study, A 1998 legal settlement reveled a link between adverse health effects and smoke, even second hand smoke, tha tobacco companies hid. Many news stories assert the presence of radioactive elements in tobacco smoke. Doctors almost always recommend not smoking.and treat a lot of lung cancer patients who were smokers. The evidence, even if circumstantial. is overwhelming.

9. The FBI spied on John Lennon. FBI spying is what they do. That a beatle would be the object is perfectly plausible. However, the next step is to look at the evidence.. FOIA documents from the CIA released in 2010 reveal that this is true.

So here is a review of the method. First, decide if you think the story is plausible. If you don’t, assume it is fake news and you are done. Second, assuming it is plausible, look at the evidence. If it is solid, then the story is true and you are done. What if the story is plausible but there is no solid evidence? Then assume it is false.

If you still aren’t sure, then ask yourself if the writer has something to gain by publishing the story? This isn’t an ad hominem attack. There is no assumption of ill will or lack of quality, just something to gain. If the answer is no, then the story is probably true. If yes, the story is probably false.