Forget about fake news and alternative facts. The truth can be used to deceive just as
easily. As Emily Dickenson wrote:
Tell the Truth but tell it slant –
Success in Circuit lies
This came to mind when I received the following graphic from
a loyal reader forwarded from the local newspaper.
This is probably a true estimate of how many Americans (56%) believe their drinking water is unsafe. It’s also true that they are mistaken in that belief.
According to the government Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC): “The
United States has one of the safest water supplies in the world. The EPA requires every municipality to test
for the presence and levels of over 90 different contaminants in public
drinking water and to provide an annual report to all customers.
Wikipedia adds that in 2016, “over 90
percent of the nation's community water systems were in compliance” with those
EPA standards.
A Harvard site warns about polyfluoroalkyl and
perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs), saying they “exceed federally recommended
safety levels in public drinking-water supplies for 6 million people in the
United States, according to a new study…”
But as a fraction of over 320 million people in the US, that’s less than 2%.
Instead of reassuring, the media emphasizes disasters and calamities about
safe drinking water like this example from National Geographic. But at the end of that article, after presenting the scary stuff, they admit, "in spite of all the good reasons to be
concerned about drinking water safety, resorting to bottles is not a sensible
reflex." Quoting their expert,
an environmental scientist at Duke
University, "People think bottled water is safer, but there is zero
evidence that is true. The quality of water in city tap water is regulated far
more closely than bottled water."
So municipalities spend billions of dollars annually so we
can wash our clothes and dishes and take showers in water that’s safe to drink
while the majority of Americans believe it’s toxic and spend billions more on
bottled water. This newspaper could have
easily looked this up, but it’s not their job to educate. It’s their job to sell newspapers, and scary “facts” sell better.
The next day I set a ketchup bottle on the table and saw (proudly
displayed) on the label: No High
Fructose Corn Syrup, No GMO Ingredients.
Although these two statements are technically true, they are mainly intended to lure uninformed
shoppers.
First, high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) for some reason has gotten a
bad reputation among food purists; but fructose, glucose and sucrose are all
sugars. This FDA website explains the
tiny chemical difference between HFCS and sugar. They conclude: “We are not aware of any evidence…that
there is a difference in safety between foods containing HFCS 42 or HFCS 55 and
foods containing similar amounts of other nutritive sweeteners with
approximately equal glucose and fructose content, such as sucrose, honey, or
other traditional sweeteners.”
These facts of no chemical or health differences are backed
up by other sources. And even those that give
reasons to avoid HFCS say it is no worse for us than sugar.
So it’s true, but slightly deceptive – the ketchup contains no HFCS; it contains
sugar instead!
Second, the main ingredient in ketchup is tomato concentrate
from tomatoes. As I’ve written before,
there are no GMO tomatoes! Likewise, the
label on the Non-GMO orange juice doesn’t mention that there are also no GMO oranges. Non-GMO statements in both
these cases are totally true – but meaningless – except to those incurious
people who don’t care about real truth.
That brings us to a recent CBS story about a Facebook
executive concerned that “the
social media platform may be hurting American democracy” and that they were “too
slow to recognize Russian interference in the 2016 election” intended to
further divide society as the
Russians weaponized information
to sow discord.
How can anyone “weaponize” information? It starts with Americans jumping to
conclusions on the basis of popular opinion, weak evidence, information that
reinforces their own biases and truths that “tell it slant.” The distress here should not be over the negative aspects of Facebook or any other media but over a severe weakness
in critical thinking, a skill in great demand as we cope with the every-increasing speed and breadth of
dissemination coupled with a serious decrease in quality of information. The problem is not with the Russian posters or the platform; it's with readers who don't question and research.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Click again on the title to add a comment