Misinformed Citizenry

Regardless of whether or not a person may know the facts behind a situation, predisposition trumps knowledge learned later on; just as instinct trumps what has been taught. It is human nature to believe in what one thinks is correct, even if there are facts that prove otherwise and one will go to the necessary lengths to prove themselves so. In Kolbert’s article, Why Facts Don’t Change Our Minds, various studies are put into use to explain this theory.

Our perception in regards to reality is frequently “in the hands of” of our community, and we form our beliefs in regards to what is real is through the media. Therefore, the documentary “We Need to Talk about Sandy Hook” by Sofia Small storm and the film “Wag the Dog,” by Barry Levinson are both examples of how the media tries to deceive people. The documentary has deceived the pubic into believing that the Sandy Hook Massacres did exist, and Wag the Dog tries to trick the public into believing that the United States will be at war. Both films use deceptions that are planned by the government to deceive the public for their own needs. Therefore, although people rely on media for legitimate information, they never know the truth unless it was experienced first hand.

Confirmation bias is the tendency for a person to search for information that solely helps support their opinion or hypothesis. For example, I’ve observed the media doing this a lot. One example that’s trending now, is that Kylie Jenner is pregnant. The media keeps going on and on about it, although none of the family members have confirmed this. The media seems to keep bringing to light the fact that she’s wearing baggy clothes, buying a box of donuts, or having a party in her backyard, which they say was her baby shower. They media ignores the fact that she’s a teenager and lots of teenagers eat unhealthy. Or the fact that she always hosts lots of different events for other people at her house, which we see on their show. The media

Ignorance due to inability to spot biased is a monumental issue in the U.S. In 1984, people did not have an option on who or what to believe. They were all required to watch a Two Minute Hate so they would dislike what the Party wanted them to dislike. The people could only see what the Party wanted them to see as no other channels they existed. In fact, the telescreens could not be shut off at all. Constant exposure to the Party’s beliefs caused people to be biased towards the government’s views. In this country, people hear, watch, and absorb news every day, but they do not always see or hear the presented bias. For example, Fox News is conservative-leaning and MSNBC is more liberal (Garrett 2&3). People who only watch one news channel without acknowledging or spotting the bias tend to accept what they hear as fact without a second thought. Depending on where information is collected or heard, the person forms opinions based on bias rather than facts without realizing the error in their wapithes and become easy to manipulation occurs.

Is our justice system fair? Is our justice system truly set out to do what it was meant to do? Or are there social factors and memory errors that come into play that can change a conviction outcome. In today’s court rooms we have, Defense attorneys, Prosecutors, judges, juries, evidence, forensics experts, witness testimonies, and of course the human memory. What better type of evidence than the human memory, right? Unfortunately, human memory is subject to the power of suggestion and unable to truly recall an event when told to recall. In other words, the story may not be the same as the one that actually happened the day of that event because many variables come into play like cross examinations and the way a question can be asked can alter the answer or how the event was perceived. The main focus of this paper is to see how the human brain is not able to effectively recall events which could possibly convict an innocent person of wrong doing. Also how lawyers use the misinformation effect to their advantage. In order to understand how something as simple as a question can decide a person’s faith we must first answer some questions. First, How does memory actually work and how is memory retrieved when your need to answer a question or being cross examined? Second, how does the misinformation effect play a role when a witness needs to testify against the defense or vice versa? Third, how can structuring a word or sentence effect the outcome of a conviction?

Most of us like to imagine our beliefs and opinions are logical and objective; however, the reality is that we tend to pay more attention to the information which supports our original ideas. And at the same time, we are trying to ignore the information which despites us. This process is called confirmation bias, and it exists in our daily lives.

The media in American society has a major influential impact on the minds and beliefs of millions of people. Whether through the news, television shows, or film, the media acts as a huge database for knowledge and instruction. It is both an auditory and visual database that can press images and ideas into people's minds. Even if the individual has no prior exposure or knowledge to something, the media can project into people's minds and leave a lasting impression. Though obviously people are aware of what they are listening to or watching, thoughts and assumptions can drift into their minds without even realizing it. These thoughts that drift in are extremely influential. The massive impact

For example, Denzel Washington was interviewed because he switches his support from voting for Hilary to Trump. Denzel said, “If you don’t read the newspaper you are uninformed and if you do read it you are misinformed”. So the reporter asks, “What do we do in a situation in like this?” Washington response was “What is the long term of too much information? One of the effects is the need to be first and not the need to be true anymore, and the media has a responsibility to tell the truth. We live in a society that what’s first and who cares, get it out there, we don’t care who it hurts or destroys or if it is true… just say it and sell it.” According to Hume, he would say that we are “maintaining these customs or habits”(Morris). I believe this is a habit in our society that we are being confirmation biased and that we only want to hear or see what we want to hear. I believe the media is making it easier for us nowadays to sustain these habits because they try to keep us in these filter bubble. Therefore, habits have caused many Americans to elect their candidate based off reports of slander, diverting the people from the real issues that affect them. We must expect the unexpected and take nothing for granted, not even life is guaranteed tomorrow. We must not be ignorant and believe the

Sunstein argues that an echo-chamber effect results when people receive news from various media outlets. Sunstein asserts that, when a person gets their news from a medium which embraces similar ideological viewpoints, this person’s beliefs not only harden, but become situated on more extreme ends of the political spectrum. Three-stage academic studies conducted over the past three decades have found that balanced presentations of news, which carefully examine both sides to an argument, are more likely to increase polarization, rather than to reduce it. This is due to “biased assimilation”, where a person credits the information which supports their original view and dismisses information which opposes it. This also explains why it is difficult to force out false rumors and factual errors, since corrections can be self-defeating, leading people to having a firmer commitment to their erroneous beliefs. However, Sunstein argues, surprising validators can be used to allow people to reconsider information from a source they find credible. Sunstein concludes with arguing that what matters most is not what is being said, but who is saying

Confirmation bias is a primary issue that prevents people from perceiving the world objectively. The phenomenon occurs when an individual chooses to expose themselves only to media and information that confirms a personally held belief rather than consider another side of the argument. In the media age we are currently in, it is remarkably uncomplicated to find countless arguments on one side of a controversial debate to buttress one’s own existing beliefs; we come to believe in a false consensus of our beliefs due to our limited exposure to other opinions. Consequently, especially in the United States due to having gone through an incredibly sensationalized presidential election, we are in a time somewhat marked by increased polarization.

Throughout the article, “No It’s Not Your Opinion, You’re Just Wrong”, Jef Rouner discusses the misinterpretation people often experience when having an opinion. He explains how false opinions arise from misconceptions. For instance, Rouner gave the example of people still believing that vaccines cause autism. Since vaccines have been proven to have no such effect, this is not an opinion, rather an invalid judgment. He also explains how a lack of information can lead to bias and incomplete opinions. Just recently, in the past presidential election, I noticed several people allow opinions instead of facts influence their perspective on the candidates. This is something that can easily be avoided by simply becoming more knowledgeable on the political

As of the most powerful and important position in the world, the President of the United States has a duty and obligation to present the truth to the American people and the rest of the world. But as shown from the 2016 election cycle and current presidency, it appears that the truth can be substituted by “alternative facts”.

Vast amounts of information that is thought to be unsafe for common knowledge is frequently withheld from society. Information that is deemed dangerous, inappropriate, or fallacious is restrained from becoming public. In the novel 1984, the Ministry of Truth is responsible for determining if information is appropriate for public knowledge. They are Oceania’s source for news and entertainment. Even if the information being presented is invalid, it is made mandatory by the Party for citizens to accept the material. In modern day society, people are faced with similar circumstances. Society is taught to believe that the media tells them the truth and that the facts that are being put forward are legitimate. In George Orwell’s novel 1984 the Ministry of Truth satirizes the dilemma that modern day society faces through media control and the censoring of information.

There are three types of thinkers, Uncritical Persons, skilled manipulators and the fair-minded critical persons. The uncritical persons are the ones that the media thrives on. They are the ones that are easily influenced in believing what they hear on the news to be true without doing their own research on what they heard. It is simply true because they read it in the newspaper or saw it on the news. These individuals want to be presented with a simple-minded, black-and-white world (page 299). A person that I can relate to as an uncritical thinker would be boyfriend’s mother. She is a difficult person to reason with. She believes in what she hears to be true without actually knowing the facts. She does not search for the truth or care too.

In his book Public Opinion (1965), W. Lippmann talks about how it is impossible have a direct experience of everything in the world, in order to be a part of the contemporary society. He believes that that people primarily depend on ‘pictures in our head’, mostly put forth by news media, in order to learn more about the world. As it is not possible to personally experience it all, Lippmann says that at numerous incidents these ‘pictures in our head’ lead us to behave in a certain manner or make certain decision based on these images. These pictures and images are delivered to us through media. According to the ABC news (1996), 76% of the people form their opinions based on what they see or read in the news while only 22% say they were well