Why post-truth era will greatly widen our divide

Amazingly, in the course of my research for a book, I am currently writing, I found a phrase that baffled me: Post-truth era. Oxford Dictionary named “post-truth” the 2016 word of the year. But what the heck is post-truth era?

To begin with, Wang, in his article, ‘Post-truth named 2016 word of the year by Oxford Dictionaries’ published in the Washington Post, stated categorically: It’s official, truth is dead. Unsurprisingly, the word is still new and is not found in many dictionaries.

According to Oxford Dictionary, post-truth is defined as “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion that appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Put in another way, people do not require truth anymore to make decisions especially on public matters like politics and religion.

GROUPTHINK

Alexander Betts perhaps puts it better: “It’s been suggested that we’ve moved to a post-factual society, where evidence and truth no longer matter, and lies have equal status to the clarity of evidence”. In line with this thought, Apostle Paul wrote in 2 Timothy 2:4, “for the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires”. Fake news sells is the new mantra. The rise of post-truth has been fuelled by social media, according to the president of Oxford Dictionary, Casper Grathwohl. Many people nowadays increasingly prefer social media news as opposed to mainstream news media.

However, unlike mainstream news media that try to maintain objective view, news appearing in social media outlets is often charged with emotion and personal belief that often make it easier for many to believe or oppose without much thought. Then, what is the force behind “post-truth”? One obvious answer is group polarisation effect. According to One Mind Therapy, group polarisation is when a group makes decisions that are more extreme than the beliefs or decisions of individual group members. That is, the sum of individuals’ beliefs coalesces to form what is known as groupthink. One of the theories explaining group polarisation is the normative influence, which states that people always tend to change their opinions when in a group to fit in. So, in matters of public interests like politics, an individual in a particular group will almost automatically conform to the groupthink.

FALL VICTIM

Groupthink, on the other hand, is a theory that states that members of a specific group tend to hold back their opinions (of course, when in opposition) for fear of being rejected by the group. The adverse effect of group polarisation is that it makes people in a particular group not to think outside the box. People become lazy to seek the truth and therefore quickly fall victim to fake news spread by their peers.

More particularly, social media has made it relatively easy for group polarisation to happen. People, especially more influential ones, often tend to throw extreme ideas to attract much attention and spark discussion in a group. While it may have been a concocted story, the debate is likely to become emotional, thereby many might believe it for fear of taking sides against the group. According to social psychologists, group polarisation effect happens subconsciously, and for this reason, many do not know that they are already victims.

EXTREMISM

Moreover, for this reason still, we understand why two opposing groups, for example, political parties, will always think that it is the other side that is wrong in a particular matter and not them. Also, because of social groups, many are only exposed to views and information that strengthen or support their already held opinions and beliefs. Social groups thus act as filter bubble.

In conclusion, the fight against tribalism and divisive politics in this post-truth era requires a shift from a focus on traditional public gathering to digital public gathering—a change from conventional group dynamics to digital group dynamics in understanding how to tackle the problem of extremism in social media.

Perhaps it is time we introduced social media in the school curriculum to help students understand its dynamics and implications. Moreover, it is advisable for one to treat social media groups as he or she would handle traditional social groups.

Mr Ochieng, is a computer scientist and a Christian evangelist with a keen interest in behavioural science. Email: [email protected]