In a world of fake news, I fell prey to it yesterday…not only did I buy it, but I transmitted it to thousands. Today, I must apologize.
Perhaps I am asking a deeper ontological question than is warranted for this blog, but I’m wondering this morning why I was the sucker yesterday. Why did I just run with a story instead of digging deeper?
It was more than just sloppiness or a desire for page clicks. It was because it fit into my worldview biases and it seemed like such a nice story. There was some truth to it: we know that Beijing wanted a head to roll. We know that Hogg expressed sympathy toward the protest movement. But it appears the valiant act of defiance I wrote about yesterday did not occur. Rupert Hogg never implicated himself in order to spare his employees.
Now I’m left feeling foolish, but also full of doubt with a good dose of cynicism (and when it comes to current events, I’m already a cynic).
And isn’t that the trouble of fake news? It’s simplistic to say “fake news” is about spreading misinformation. Certainly that is part of it. But that’s only the first level. The deeper and more menacing reality is that fake news is aimed to sow doubt and confusion. Like terrorism, the aim is to cause fear. Fake news does not lead to fear of bodily harm, but it does lead to fear that we simply cannot trust anyone. That undermines the fragile society in which we live.
The good news, if you want to call it that, is that this “correction” does not change my assessment of Hogg as a great candidate to become the next American Airlines CEO.
But I cannot help asking questions. Was this “fake news” an effort by the Taiwanese press to make China look bad? Or was it an effort by the Chinese to sow misinformation they knew would be picked up in Taiwan in order that they could gloat over the fake news and further argue that the reporting on the Hong Kong protests have been biased and misleading in general? Why does the human brain love conspiracy theories?
CONCLUSION
All I can do is promise that I will continue to learn from errors like this. Fake feel-good stories can be just as pernicious as fake bad news stories. Next time I will ask more questions. We all should…but let’s not give up on the system in the process.
> Read More: What Does A Lying Imbecile Teach Us About Airline Compensation And Truth Itself?
Given that you are an attorney it’s inexcusable actually.
I’m sure the standards for establishing facts are rigorous enough to prevent the same type of mistake (reporting from a single unverified news source) from making its way into a court of law.
Lol… Is writing this blog a billable timesheet then?
Thanks for owning up to it! But yeah, it’s a real problem. We need legal reform as well before 2020. Maybe it was just wishful thinking. Don’t be so hard on yourself though. We all make mistakes but with a blog your mistakes are just more public.
I don’t think you were a sucker. It was reasonable to publish as you did, given the widespread reporting of the story.
This one resonated because it would have been a rare case of a CEO doing something entirely honourable, ‘cocking a snoot ‘ at those perceived to be the bullies in the process. We all like that scenario, and many of us bought it ( myself included)
Thanks for the mea culpa. That is what I like about @Matthew. Other sites posted the same story but have not acknowledged the mistake.
I don’t necessarily blame you for falling for for this one. As you and Paolo said, when a story comes across that a) aligns with your personal worldview, and b) paints an ordinarily “villainous” character (a corporate CEO) in a positive light, I think we’re all inclined to buy it. But I applaud you for owning up to your mistake.
NOW, that being said, yes, I’m going to needle you about this yet again – when you live by the clickbait, you also die by the clickbait. I don’t put this story in the same bucket as the ones you post about drunk passengers and such, but the reality is, when you choose to post salacious/headline grabbing material, you’re going to get it wrong some of the time, and end up with egg on your face in the process. It’s why I keep (good naturedly, of course) trying to convince you to stop posting these things, or at least be really careful when you do.
Because that story unconciously gave you a chance to discredit chinese government. As an american, it is common to think that foreigner (in casu chinese people or PRC) is bad. If they are bad, they must have forced the CEO to resign against his own will). Then the CEO must be a good person! By then you’ve had bitten the bait.
Nonsense. We believe that authoritarian, fascist, thuggish governments are bad. The Chinese people? They are great – and like people anywhere in the world, they would be better off if their government wasn’t run by a corrupt bunch of thugs.
It’s pretty simple. Freedom. The rule of law. Individual rights. It’s not complicated – for most people.
Only the boot-lickers and those being paid by the goons in Beijing have any trouble understanding these things.
MeanMeosh, I’ll agree with much of what you wrote, but don’t think my story was clickbait yesterday. Yes, the drunk stories certainly are.
Matthew,
The only reasonable penance is publishing some of you OWN drunk stories, LoL 😉
We frequently believe and agree with news and stories that fit our mental construct of the world, and in particular with group mentalities we identify with – usually outside of rational thought. Steven Pinker’s book How the Mind Works is an excellent read, and delves into the subject thoroughly. After reading it I started identifying numerous times that I was believing what I wanted to believe.
Well said, and thank you. FWIW I agree with all of what’s posted above.
What happened to Debit’s comment? I actually thought it was tame?
I didn’t delete it.
Absolutely no apology is needed. Truly understanding people understand that we all make mistakes.