Truth decayFake News: Emotions and Experiences, Not More Data, Could Be the Antidote

By David Knights and Torkild Thanem

Published 9 October 2019

At a time when public debate around the world is suffering from a collision between facts and “alternative facts”, experts must find new ways to reach people. For example: Donald Trump has made more than 12,000 false or misleading statements since becoming U.S. president, and yet, he remains immensely popular with his political base, which is energized by his emotional and often aggressive displays. No amount of raw data appears capable of changing their minds. While it may seem fitting to challenge post-truth politics with quantitative research, statistical data and hard facts, this is unlikely always to be sufficient. If social scientists care about being relevant in the struggle against post-truth politics, they cannot merely rely on quantitative data and raw facts. They also need to do research that connects to, brings to life and fleshes out the struggles of people in everyday life.

At a time when public debate around the world is suffering from a collision between facts and “alternative facts”, experts must find new ways to reach people.

According to the Washington Post, Donald Trump has made more than 12,000 false or misleading statements since becoming U.S. president. Despite this, he remains immensely popular with his own political base, which is energized by his emotional and often aggressive displays. No amount of raw data appears capable of changing their minds.

In the U.K., prime minister Boris Johnson is adopting a similar approach. Despite an already dubious reputation in matters personal and professional, and a number of questionable actions since becoming prime minister, including the unlawful prorogation of parliament, he continues to excite political supporters with his ostensible charm and aggressive rhetoric of grit and determination. Similarly, he rarely lets facts get in the way of his message.

No doubt Trump and Johnson are passionate when they speak, but they seem to care little about the truth. Both incessantly repeat their exaggerated, if not always wholly inaccurate, arguments. They routinely exploit their own gut feelings, use animated gestures to make unfounded claims and dismiss experts and facts that contradict their views. This is the dark side of a political world which often thrives on hatred, greed and arrogance, resistance to facts and a short-circuiting of reason and rationality.

Facts Aren’t Enough
While it may seem fitting to challenge post-truth politics with quantitative research, statistical data and hard facts, this is unlikely always to be sufficient – at least not when confronting emotive societal problems, such as Brexit or climate change.

Since facts and expert knowledge are frequently dismissed as “fake news” or drowned out in a deluge of “alternative facts”, simply offering more data and facts may not work against politicians and people who show resistance to facts that conflict with their prejudices or feelings.

Whether examining Brexit, public austerity measures or the effects of climate change, one limitation is that facts and data generated through quantitative social research are presented as if detached from the people they concern as well as those involved in their production. Far removed from people’s lived experiences, they risk displacing any sense of what it is to be human. As such, they are, perhaps, too easy to dismiss.