Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

To think "post truth" is an incredibly dangerous phrase...

92 replies

MoreBushThanMoss · 19/12/2016 22:34

... For media outlets/ pundits/ commentators to be using???

It legitimises what is basically lies and propaganda, by suggesting "post truth" goes beyond truth in at best an ambiguous, at worst a positive way, with the subtle subtext that it could be a better reality....

Egs of "post truth" politics - the election of trump. Brexit. The Assad/ Russian response to Aleppo criticism.

None of these are "good things"- and all are egs of dangerous right wing campaigns based on repressing truth, spreading misinformation and bamboozling the public. So should we be sanctioning this atrocious abuse of power/ media / social media by calling it a symptom of the "post truth" era - or calling it what it is- lies?

Discuss

OP posts:

MaidOfStars · 20/12/2016 16:10

Does post-truth mean simply that anyone voting Brexit/Trump is so duped/stupid that we have moved into a parallel universe of lies based politics?
No, I don't think it does mean that. It is how the political narrative is framed, not really about how people respond to it (IMO).

NameChanger22 · 20/12/2016 16:11

Post truth is an inaccurate phrase if it's only being used to describe the media now.

The media has always been full of lies, half truths, bias and propaganda. It's nothing new.

almondpudding · 20/12/2016 16:13

I think you are arguing the opposite of other people then maid.

Others upthread have said they mean the public response not the framing.

And that has been my experience - that people are not discussing facts and are much more emotional. I don't see a difference in political framing.

So under your definition of post truth, I don't think we are in a post truth society.

user1471451327 · 20/12/2016 16:14

There has been a drip-drip -drip of post truth propaganda for some years, with Boris Johnson as one of its main perpetrators. the fact that he was just making stuff up did not bother him or his editors www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/07/boris-johnson-peddled-absurd-eu-myths-and-our-disgraceful-press-followed-his.

Believeitornot · 20/12/2016 16:15

Post truth is about lies though isn't it? Plenty of lies were thrown out there - with very tenuous links to facts but ultimately they weren't true.

Let's call a spade a spade.

wasonthelist · 20/12/2016 16:16

Brexiters could give no objective facts to support their case.
Your opinion is not allowing you to see this objectively. What you mean is that they offered nothing you would accept as an "objective fact" because you don't believe anyone could logically vote to leave - but that's just your opinion.

There was very little on either side in the way of facts for a simple reason - there are a lot of unknowns along either path, and very very little that could have been known for certain.

WrongTrouser · 20/12/2016 16:20

Smalls

Brexiters could give no objective facts to support their case

This is opinion. One objective fact is that if we leave the EU we can make our own decisions about freedom of movement.

they hadn't even sorted out an exit strategy

This is the government's job.

The arguments were all emotional, including the billboard showing a stream of refugees leaving Syria

And the remain arguments weren't? All the attempts to link all things sugar and spice to remain and all things nasty to leave (even down to the horrifying attempts by some to link the murder of Jo Cox to leave voters)? Not emotional - you're having a laugh!

That made it very difficult to argue factually against leaving, or for staying

Why?

One 'fact' that Brexiters offered was a vast amount of money for new hospitals every day, which is now admitted to be false

No, it was a suggestion that if the country has control of more of its money, we could chose to spend more on the NHS, which is a fact.

MaidOfStars · 20/12/2016 16:20

I think you are arguing the opposite of other people then maid
Entirely possible.

Others upthread have said they mean the public response not the framing

an adjective “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief”
This seems, to me, to place the emphasis on the person trying to drive opinion, not the person being influenced?

Believeitornot · 20/12/2016 16:22

Can anyone point me to the objective facts re the Brexit campaign?

I don't remember any.

I also don't remember any from remain either.

Believeitornot · 20/12/2016 16:23

No, it was a suggestion that if the country has control of more of its money, we could chose to spend more on the NHS, which is a fact

It wasn't a suggestion. It was advertised as fact.

The figure of £350m was touted as fact. The £350m is not based on fact. And there was no if.

MaidOfStars · 20/12/2016 16:27

it was a suggestion that if the country has control of more of its money, we could chose to spend more on the NHS, which is a fact
Ok, it is a "fact" that we "could" choose to spend more money on the NHS. Just like it is a "fact" that I "could" choose to jump out of a plane with only an oversized silk handkerchief in a rucksack to stop me splatting.

We send the EU £350 million a week. Let's fund our NHS instead
And how does this compare to what you say above? Do you think there was a deliberate attempt to deceive?

Again, an example, I'm really not interested in going over the Brexit result.

WrongTrouser · 20/12/2016 16:36

The figure was wrong, I grant you.

The slogan was "let's spend it on the NHS instead".

"Let's meet for a drink sometime" "Let's drop this subject" Suggestions.

How about Osbourne's incredibly precise £3400 per household? Is that "post-truth".

WrongTrouser · 20/12/2016 16:53

Ok, it is a "fact" that we "could" choose to spend more money on the NHS. Just like it is a "fact" that I "could" choose to jump out of a plane with only an oversized silk handkerchief in a rucksack to stop me splatting

I'm getting a bit lost When I use "fact", I mean something which is true. So facts can be trivial, important, world shattering, or only relevant if a very particular chain of events happens. That doesn't effect whether they are facts.

The fact bit I was referring to was not that we could spend more on the NHS, but that, if we leave the EU, we will have control over the money which would have gone to the EU.

I have spent far longer than is sensible discussing Brexit on MN, and it does seem a bit as if remain has "facts" and leave has "debunked facts" and opinion (irony alert - I actually believe both have some facts, some debunked facts and an awful lot of opinion).

TulipsInAJug · 20/12/2016 17:15

Brexit was one example from the UK

No, it wasn't. Brexit was a vote to leave the UK. Stop making it into something else.

'Lies' were told on both sides. No one side has the monopoly on truth or integrity.

larrygrylls · 20/12/2016 17:24

Wasonthelist,

Excellent post (above). The idea of 'post truth' is people preferring dodgy sound bites to 'objective' truth. However, outside of science, there is far less objective truth around than people realise. When it comes to forecasting, economists do it little better than throwing darts at a dart board (and that is an objectively probable fact as we can back test forecasts).

I don't think many people go to the witch doctor about their illnesses any more (though alternative medicine is close).

The reality is that 'post truth' is a term bandied about to discredit the other side of the argument......which is sort of ironic, for if the people shouting it really knew the 'truth', they would state it rather than an attack phrase.

ButterfliesRfree · 20/12/2016 22:20

Tulips - why is Brexit a vote to leave the U.K.?

TulipsInAJug · 20/12/2016 22:38

Sorry, vote to leave the EU! Freudian slip?

Flip

1 2 3 4

Swipe left for the next trending thread