"I don't know." Getting acquainted with those
three words seems more critical than ever, even though we are bombarded daily
with globs of information, most of which is fairly accessible.
Nevertheless, when we don't know something - whether it's a detail we can't remember or when someone introduces a piece of new information - our tendency too often is to not take the time to get the facts. Instead, we allow ourselves to continue our unawareness of the underlying facts surrounding that unfamiliar information.
In pre-search engine days, we didn't have the time-saving luxury of using a search engine to look something up. In the mid-1980s, for example, when I struggled to remember the name of the actor who played Sir Thomas More in the movie "A Man for All Seasons," my go-to solution was to call my mother in Virginia, since I knew she was a big fan of the movie. Today, it takes me mere seconds to find the answer on IMDB.com.
For those of us who don't limit our news feeds or social networks only to sources or people who share our worldviews, we're regularly faced with posts that seem to contradict our views on a particular topic - whether it has to do with the efficacy of facemasks, the eligibility of a candidate for political office or any number of things. It's easy enough to scroll past those things we think are wrong or that contradict our understanding of something, but we're often left ignorant of whether such posts are factually accurate.
Regardless of the time it takes to check something out, the right thing is to embrace the "I don't know" and to look it up. It's also necessary to both be open to correction from others and take the time to call out when we see something fishy in a post or shared article. Friends do point out to friends when something they post has no basis in fact. This is especially true as the U.S. presidential campaigns heat up in their final few months. There are bound to be factually inaccurate declarations proffered by supporters of candidates from all parties.
When possible, the right thing is to call out friends who speak or post fallacious information, even if we support the same candidate as they do. This might not change someone's view on something, but allowing erroneous information to proliferate without calling it out makes us complicit in allowing the epidemic of misinformation to continue. Calling it out may not stop the spread entirely, but it's a start. Herd immunity may not yet exist for coronavirus, but we can develop it as a weapon against the scourge of fake news.
Luckily, we are not at the mercy of busy phone lines or snail mail in the search for verified facts. Beyond Snopes.com - which can be a decent source to check out hoaxes and bogus internet posts - there are plenty of sources to check out facts when it comes to political discourse. Some of the best include Politifact.com, which is owned by The Poynter Institute for Media Studies (full disclosure: I was among the first group of ethics fellows at Poynter in 2001), and FactCheck.org, which is run by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. The Associated Press (https://apnews.com/APFactCheck) and Reuters (https://www.reuters.com/fact-check) are two news agencies that also provide great fact-checking resources.
We have the tools we need to check out the information regularly thrown at us. The right thing is to take the time to check out the facts that we simply do not know and to encourage others to do the same.
And yes, in case you're still wondering, my mother did know who played Thomas More. It was Paul Scofield. You can look it up.
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice," is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School.
Nevertheless, when we don't know something - whether it's a detail we can't remember or when someone introduces a piece of new information - our tendency too often is to not take the time to get the facts. Instead, we allow ourselves to continue our unawareness of the underlying facts surrounding that unfamiliar information.
In pre-search engine days, we didn't have the time-saving luxury of using a search engine to look something up. In the mid-1980s, for example, when I struggled to remember the name of the actor who played Sir Thomas More in the movie "A Man for All Seasons," my go-to solution was to call my mother in Virginia, since I knew she was a big fan of the movie. Today, it takes me mere seconds to find the answer on IMDB.com.
For those of us who don't limit our news feeds or social networks only to sources or people who share our worldviews, we're regularly faced with posts that seem to contradict our views on a particular topic - whether it has to do with the efficacy of facemasks, the eligibility of a candidate for political office or any number of things. It's easy enough to scroll past those things we think are wrong or that contradict our understanding of something, but we're often left ignorant of whether such posts are factually accurate.
Regardless of the time it takes to check something out, the right thing is to embrace the "I don't know" and to look it up. It's also necessary to both be open to correction from others and take the time to call out when we see something fishy in a post or shared article. Friends do point out to friends when something they post has no basis in fact. This is especially true as the U.S. presidential campaigns heat up in their final few months. There are bound to be factually inaccurate declarations proffered by supporters of candidates from all parties.
When possible, the right thing is to call out friends who speak or post fallacious information, even if we support the same candidate as they do. This might not change someone's view on something, but allowing erroneous information to proliferate without calling it out makes us complicit in allowing the epidemic of misinformation to continue. Calling it out may not stop the spread entirely, but it's a start. Herd immunity may not yet exist for coronavirus, but we can develop it as a weapon against the scourge of fake news.
Luckily, we are not at the mercy of busy phone lines or snail mail in the search for verified facts. Beyond Snopes.com - which can be a decent source to check out hoaxes and bogus internet posts - there are plenty of sources to check out facts when it comes to political discourse. Some of the best include Politifact.com, which is owned by The Poynter Institute for Media Studies (full disclosure: I was among the first group of ethics fellows at Poynter in 2001), and FactCheck.org, which is run by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. The Associated Press (https://apnews.com/APFactCheck) and Reuters (https://www.reuters.com/fact-check) are two news agencies that also provide great fact-checking resources.
We have the tools we need to check out the information regularly thrown at us. The right thing is to take the time to check out the facts that we simply do not know and to encourage others to do the same.
And yes, in case you're still wondering, my mother did know who played Thomas More. It was Paul Scofield. You can look it up.
Jeffrey L. Seglin, author of The Simple Art of Business Etiquette: How to Rise to the Top by Playing Nice," is a senior lecturer in public policy and director of the communications program at Harvard's Kennedy School.
Follow him on Twitter: @jseglin
Do you have ethical questions that you need answered? Send them to jeffreyseglin@gmail.com.
(c) 2020 JEFFREY L. SEGLIN. Distributed by TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.
No comments:
Post a Comment