Democratic Primaries
Related: About this forumHow internet insinuation becomes campaign fact: a warning, using examples from Warren campaign
A smart piece by Rebecca Solnit. She uses two examples from Elizabeth Warren campaign, but it's about much much more than that -about the election in general and about internet-fueled opinions in general. This kind of thing has happened, is happening, and will happen, to every primary candidate, and it will certainly happen to the Democratic nominee in the general election.
First, Solnit describes a poorly written WaPo story that misrepresented Warren's legal work, but (more or less) died because people who actually knew something hit back hard through social media to correct the facts and insinuations. The second story is about misrepresentation by a blogger about the person who introduced Elizabeth Warren at a speech in Oakland, CA, and how that morphed into wildly inaccurate characterizations of Warren's education policy.
https://lithub.com/rebecca-solnit-how-internet-insinuation-becomes-campaign-fact/
There was actually a nice victory over distortion and insinuation a couple of weeks ago. The Washington Post put out a story on May 23 that was titled While teaching, Elizabeth Warren worked on more than 50 legal matters, charging as much as $675 an hour. (If you look it up now, the title has been changed to not shout about the money any more.) It was kind of a nonstory: one of the nations leading bankruptcy lawyers, while teaching at one of the nations most distinguished law schools, did some work on the side, as law professors apparently often do. If you didnt know anything about legal experts compensation rates, $675 an hour might seem high, and the whole thing seemed to be trying to suggest that there was something shady about the whole thing. Perhaps women are not supposed to earn a lot of money, though we knew from the sideswipes about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezs waitress work that we are not supposed to work in low wage jobs either. Perhaps women are always either too much or not enough. For the record, I am wildly enthused about Warren as a presidential candidate, but I was enthused about accuracy a long time before she came along, and this is a story mostly about accuracy and its opposites. The stories Im relating could be told about any number of other candidates whove been misrepresented in ways that have stuck as smears.
. . . .
Response to the Washington Posts story about her $675 an hour was a best case scenario. A barrage of legal experts, lawyers, and law school professors (and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) hit social media, while readers hit the Washington Post with 2,700 comments; those that I read were all scathing. By the end of the day, Slate had a story headlined Washington Post Discovers That Elizabeth Warren Was Paid a Reasonable Fee for Providing Legal Services to Unobjectionable Clients and Esquire and New York Magazine had also mocked the Posts insinuations. . . Eight days later, things didnt go as well, perhaps because the misinformation didnt start out in a high-profile outlet. . . . The falsehoods and insinuations seem to have influenced a lot of people, and I heard from locals that Warren was losing support and supporters over this. Some of that is on people who were careless about their criteria for reaching a conclusion, but Ive seen how this works with earlier smears about earlier candidates: the first round may be malicious, the second is gullible, and then the weaponized information becomes what everyone thinks they know, or a vague unease, or a fuzzy suspicion. It dilutes, a smear becoming a stain becoming a taint.
In my own dreams of educational reform, theres a curriculum focused on how to research anything and check everything, how to understand what is and isnt substantiated by the facts, when you do and dont have the evidence to draw a conclusion, and how to live with the uncertainty and mystery that abound in all of us. Such an education would inoculate against the propaganda, lies, distortions, and rumors that circulate so freely now, on the left and in the center as well as on the right. In the meantime, the responsibility for the news rests with consumers as well as producers, or rather when we accept and repeat statements we too become producers of the beliefs that shape this world. It behooves us to do so with care.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
delisen
(6,044 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
rgbecker
(4,834 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided