Quote:
Originally Posted by QuantumIguana
..People passed along the story of George Washington and the Cherry Tree for ages. Would you assert that they actually knew the story to be false?
|
In many instances, Yes.
To claim otherwise infers, as I laid out, an irrational trust in human honesty. I gave you an example of another situation (shoplifting) where surveys show that many of us are inherently dishonest. However, you discarded that opportunity to seek the truth on that, seemingly claiming that there is no reason to expect people dishonest in that way from being dishonest in the stories they pass on (and perhaps it did not suit your agenda to do so?).
Furthermore, I gave the example of politicians, activists, journalists, etc. I have the experience of working with those types of people for whom it is not uncommon for them to knowingly tell or write stories with content within them of no fact, or to misquote others in order to embellish the story, the article or their own case. I have then seen that material being represented dishonestly as being unshakable truths by those whose agendas were similarly aligned. It would also appear that large parts of the population agree with me as those professions are shown in surveys to be among the least trusted by others.
For example, while all polls say similar a just published Gallup poll finds only 32% of Americans say they have "a great deal" or "a fair amount" of trust in the mass media (and Americans are not alone in that). I take it you believe that the stories that journalists are writing, or the stories and the "quotes" they pass on are not known to them to often be in part false or misleading; that despite the fact that the majority of the population believe that material to be often in part false or misleading? And as I said, the readers of that material are often not above passing on what they know to be shady if it suits their own agenda to do so.
I'll leave it at that.