The Power of Political Misinformation

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/14/AR2008091402375_pf.html

Political scientists Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler provided two groups of volunteers with the Bush administration's prewar claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. One group was given a refutation -- the comprehensive 2004 Duelfer report that concluded that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction before the United States invaded in 2003. Thirty-four percent of conservatives told only about the Bush administration's claims thought Iraq had hidden or destroyed its weapons before the U.S. invasion, but 64 percent of conservatives who heard both claim and refutation thought that Iraq really did have the weapons. The refutation, in other words, made the misinformation worse.

A similar "backfire effect" also influenced conservatives told about Bush administration assertions that tax cuts increase federal revenue. One group was offered a refutation by prominent economists that included current and former Bush administration officials. About 35 percent of conservatives told about the Bush claim believed it; 67 percent of those provided with both assertion and refutation believed that tax cuts increase revenue.

In a paper approaching publication, Nyhan, a PhD student at Duke University, and Reifler, at Georgia State University, suggest that Republicans might be especially prone to the backfire effect because conservatives may have more rigid views than liberals: Upon hearing a refutation, conservatives might "argue back" against the refutation in their minds, thereby strengthening their belief in the misinformation. Nyhan and Reifler did not see the same "backfire effect" when liberals were given misinformation and a refutation about the Bush administration's stance on stem cell research.

the fox news effect. the constant reinforcing of propaganda from the tv. the rw hate radio guys reinforcing fox. as liberals we don't operate like that. the media barely even discusses what's important to us and all of us don't get air america.

As a former insider in one (involuntary, married to a member) for 5 years at a fairly high level, I can vouch for that. It is a cult. It intentionally and systematicly destroys reasoning. And it's all nicely hidden from public view, done that way.

We won't get anywhere in ridding ourselves of this toxic political pov until we do something about "snapping" a lot more people out of that religious cult. Snapping (out) is what the professionals on cults call exiting from it. It's just as necessary as election campaigning.

It isn't b/c of Christianity, all religions or even belief systems can be corrupted and used to do the same thing - as long as they include a rejection of independent thinking, and of course the bigger the group the more that's the case - ultimately they become a cult of personality... "don't think for yourself, I'll do it for you". They don't evaluate logic or facts, they evaluate the messenger instead. That's why we have the character/values criteria becoming so all-important since the 1980s. All cults are the same for that... any kind is the same. (The Taliban and religious right are the same thing, merely culturally different.) Rick Ross and some other researchers have looked into that mindset extensively and the process of it both going "in" and coming "out".

The religious right is just the propagenda wing of the political right.

http://www.rickross.com/

I recommend too, "Snapping" and "Holy Terror" by Flo Conway and Joel Siegelman.

When someone questions the stands of the leader of one's group, even with important new information, the "authoritarian personality" responds by closing ranks. John Dean's book discusses the political implications of this category of people. The categorization has been accepted for many years in psychological circles and relates, somehow, to harsh parental discipline internalized by the child.

If we, as a species, don't counter much of this in the political sphere, we're plain doomed, since too many of our decisions will be irrational.