Re:What happens when a Pacific island upsets China
by anoncow2018sund on Monday August 20, 2018 @01:59AM
(#17797992)
From what I see, the problem isn't so much with the truth, but rather the narrative and interpretation of these facts.
For example, suppose a vaccine had a 90% success rate. This is the truth, however anti-vaxxers will focus on the 10% failure rate.
Both China and Taiwan agree there was a civil war and the losers retreated to Taiwan. However, the narrative of the event is where it differs.
Re:What happens when a Pacific island upsets China
by mistermann on Monday August 20, 2018 @11:44AM
(#17800868)
> From what I see, the problem isn't so much with the truth, but rather the narrative and interpretation of these facts.
Exactly.
> For example, suppose a vaccine had a 90% success rate. This is the truth, however anti-vaxxers will focus on the 10% failure rate.
And pro-vaxxers will "focus" (ie: discuss that, and only that) the success rate. But if you don't cover up the 10% and someone finds out, this is how "conspiracy theories" get started.
Voting with your wallet or voicing your concerns seem fairly futile to me.
What I believe could make a difference is trying to educate people on what the honest (non-partisan) reality of the situation is, to the best of your ability. When you encounter someone online stating something that is untrue (flat out wrong, generalized to the point of important detail being missed, mischaracterization of news or literature), speak up with a more accurate representation of the truth. The goal of this is not to change the mind of the person who has written something untrue (although that's a nice side benefit in the rare case it happens), it is for the hundreds/thousands of other readers who subconsciously form opinions based on the entirety of information they consume, so they they at least have a chance of hearing lesser-biased versions of reality.