Are people really too feeble to tell if a politician is lying?

There is a bit of a campaign afoot at the moment to get Facebook to “factcheck” what politicians can say on their platform. The Guardian is pushing hard on this. So is Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez – the Guardian naturally presents Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez as a kind of superhero.

The video linked above shows her launching a series of double-bind and loaded questions (the kind where the question contains the assertion or smear it wants to put on someone) on Mark Zuckerberg, the head of Facebook. In reality a pathetic performance by someone who doesn’t understand her brief.

She says:

So, you won’t take down lies or you will take down lies? I think that’s just a pretty simple yes or no

In reality Zuckerberg had just explained a) that it isn’t that simple; under certain legislation they would be obliged to take down lies but not in all cases and so it would depend on the specific case and b) in general in his opinion people should themselves decide when a politician is lying.

This latter view is of course ‘democracy’. What the Guardian and Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez  are calling for is a situation where what politicians say is screened in advance by some kind of secret censors and the public can only see the cleaned version. This would be a totalitarian state media. I wonder if they understand what they are calling for?

The context is the fragile mentation of this generation – especially amongst liberals – who are unable to cope with multiple divergent opinions and shades of truth. They want a single clean truth on all subjects and any other point of view should be banned (and the one expressing it exiled). Long gone are the days of “agreeing to disagree” and “I respect your right to hold an opinion even if i disagree with it”.


Author: justinwyllie

EFL Teacher and Photographer