Fake News

A few weeks ago I wrote about a lecture I attended at York University. At the time I mentioned Climate change and perhaps informing you about it. Why not? It does not provide me with education hours, however, I am quite concerned about global warming and therefore any informed discussion of it. The speaker was Dr Fuyuki Kurasawa - York Research Chair in Global Digital Citizenship, Department of Sociology. The topic was, “Do We Live in a Post-Truth Age? Climate Change Research as the Digital Canary in a Coal Mine.” Dr Kurasawa stated that there is much information now which is not following research methods. There is an epistemic culture. The dissemination of knowledge shifted in the digital age. Epistemic judgement is being challenged. Mostly those 30 years and younger are assessing movies and things like amazon and rotten tomatoes; Rejecting science by influencing popular stars. They influence general opinion. Evidence is now becoming erratically contested. We see the increasing of evidence being challenged with pseudo or para science, on line trash and on line presence, eg.. the more followers, the more credibility one is given regardless of actual knowledge. This is a problem because there is nothing present to balance it. During 2009 a troll of emails regarding climate change were hacked and leaked on line. People claimed that scientists were deliberating their data. In actual fact - a group of scientists talking to each other and language was misinterpreted. This had a measurable impact on popular opinion, an impact on U.S.A. public opinion. The oil industry was challenging American Sovereignty which continues to this day. There is a clash between these cultures. Scientific method is being challenged by two other groups. There is a belief that getting likes makes one popular - viral - often becomes true in popular ways but not based on facts. Blogs - There are blogs in attempting to correct the popular but not though not facts. This includes other social networks such as twitter. There are two characteristics - Emergence of polarization. Believers and deniers of global change. Kind of diffusion of influence. Not only two positions pro/against climate change. There is consensus of actors, agnosticism/ corroboration, denialism and advocacy. What does the professor think? There is a paradox - nothing is like it seems. There is an emergence of scientists trying to save science and para/pseudo science claiming to be the truth. They claim their data is not accepted by scientists because of other motives. They are trying to give the public the idea that they are true scientists. In his personal opinion, private networks should be regulated and I agree.