Lies First; Facts Later

Manufacturing Dissent

[I wrote this on Friday, and published it early yesterday. Soon after, we all watched the horrifying killing of Alex Pretti. Everything seems blown apart. Everyone ignores their previous stance to “wait a few days” after a tragic event. Hot takes abound, including the stupidest ones from DHS and MN state figures. The Minnesota National Guard is finally deployed in Minneapolis. Good and Pretti had tragic deaths. The media and political translations of these horrors concern me:]

In Minnesota, it’s supposed to be a day of protest on a “Day of Truth and Freedom”. I have not seen much truth in Minnesota lately. Freedom is another word for nothing left to lose, particularly for our protesters.

With the ICE incursion after the finding of widespread fraud in MN, and possible legal immigration fraud (with Operation Twin Shields), protests happen daily. Protests are easy to avoid, while opinions are unavoidable. The left were already loudly upset, and it’s easy to know what they think and feel: they share it everywhere. After the Renee Good shooting, I hear more centrists concerned about ICE. Those on the right believe 1.) ICE can detain any illegal, 2.) ICE can arrest those interfering with operations, 3.) ICE is militarized because they face opposition from those who will dox or harm them.

Even if the right is legally correct, their argument is not morally convincing enough Minnesotans to support ICE. Those who support ICE hope things calm down soon. They urge locals to cooperate with ICE. But, the saga continues, with politicians and media hyping outrage, and local law enforcement invisible at times. Today, when -50 F wind hits your face, many feel the weight of taxes, fraud, and violence, and make plans to leave America’s Siberia.

The protesters want to stop the ICE brutality they see in their news feeds first. Their feed shapes their view. They don’t usually ask, “Is all of this true? Could any of this be wrong?” Instead, they use emotional outrage as a call to share these clips with everyone. The media finds the shared clip, and uses it to outrage bait. It’s on-the-ground, breaking news: no one will blame them if they get it wrong! Then, academics read the story in their preferred paper of record, supported by the fallacious authority of brand name news. The most educated lack time for close reading, or examination of the narrative. “Information literacy” is now choosing an information bubble aligned with a version of authority based on confirmation bias.

Some protests in Minnesota are peaceful, some are not. The conflicts happen with those who hunt down ICE. Conflicts always arise with those who seek them. Those who interrupt what they call illegitimate law enforcement are not practicing peaceful protest, but Civil Disobedience or resistance. These actions have consequences. Yet, are the consequences of these actions just or brutal?

This brutality of ICE depends on circumstantial truth. The evidence leaves out context that happened off-screen and out of frame. For instance, a recent story featured a protester getting sprayed in the face while pinned to the ground. The terrifying photograph of The Star Tribune, incites anger at injustice. The clip I shared in the link above, and this show the same scene: it happened quickly. The photograph makes it seem like the voluminous, neon spray continued forever. But was it necessary? The video shows the protester resists arrest, despite multiple officers helping out. We don’t even know what happened. Did they deserve a face full of chemicals? Maybe not. Use of chemical deterrent by American law enforcement is not new, but it is used often by ICE. ICE in Minneapolis are surrounded by protesters, some who attack them. Criticism of tear gas is reasonable, but ICE is outnumbered. They should not use billy clubs, tasers, or guns unless necessary--when is that? Without tear gas, this suggests ICE’s only acceptable recourse is to surrender: madness. Regardless, it is all about the image of brutality, and not about the facts.

This will be the case in all instances.

The clips of injustice incite others to stand against ICE and Trump. Most sought evidence of Trump’s dictatorial ambitions. Facts are shoehorned in later. Opposing facts tell another story, but follow far after the media message. It’s too late. The amygdala of the audience has been activated: facts no longer matter.

Take the case of the couple in Minneapolis whose children suffered medical emergencies from tear gas in their car. The story this couple told was that they were trying to get home when ICE threw a flash bang into or near their car, compromising their baby’s breathing. Shameful.

After this story aired, other stories showed that this couple were at the protests without their kids, possibly for over 40 minutes. We can see their cold, clouded breath. They left their 6 month and 2-year-old kids in their car. Sure: new cars have better heaters, the car was locked, or they got out of the car temporarily to see what happened. Yet, why were both parents out? One of them should stay with the kids. Anyway, the narratives fall apart when facts surface afterward. You can decide for yourself. By now, watchers of the first story already decided based on the first story where ICE’s tear gas sent a baby to the hospital. The baby was an innocent victim in both stories, but the parents weren’t. Where are the follow-ups from the news? I’m not holding my breath.

Yesterday, I saw the story of the 5-year-old boy captured by ICE and used as bait to catch his dad. “Wow: that’s terrible,” I thought. This was followed by DHS releasing a different story. They claim ICE begged the mother to take the son inside, but she refused to open the door. ICE officers claim they treated the boy well. Thus, the Ecuadorian father and son were detained, possibly taken to a TX facility. Facts still trickle out. The story was snatched up. On one side, after years of fake news, some reject media stories, favoring DHS narratives. On the other side, due to political lies, others reject government statements: the media’s truth is better. At least Dean Philips admitted the father fled, and ICE cared for the boy. Honesty matters. Liars abound, and institutional trust is in the toilet. The media should hold the government accountable, but if media get it wrong, who holds them to account? If the government gets it wrong, they once faced trial or failed elections. Does that still happen?

How do you know what to believe anymore? If something is presented without evidence, it can be dismissed without evidence if using Hitchens’s razor. That’s easy. AI video and image spotters spend all day rejecting fake video evidence. Still, many real videos, photos, or “eyewitness testimony” lack corroboration or wider context. What should we do?

Typically, when news takes an emotional stance that couples with a political view, my bull-poop detector goes off. A headline of “ICE Uses 5-Year-Old Boy as Bait,” triggers our desire to protect children: emotional appeal activated! I feel upset. I set aside my upset, and try to read fully, and note a question or incongruity. I have gotten it wrong before. I’ve accepted bad information with a hidden political agenda, sometimes from “trustworthy” media. Emotionally activating information is not necessarily incorrect, but this pathos clues me into possible factual misrepresentation. If I dwell in emotions, I overlook important details, usually stuck in the penultimate paragraph. Others gain if I act irrationally. So, when I am angry or sad, I stop, engage reason, and ask questions. I look for alternative sources.

Furthermore, I participate in groups that analyze news. But even this lie spotting group faces challenges. I don’t mind if online people call me a far-right, heartless b*tch. Ad hominem attacks signal they lost the argument. In my media group, some people share emotional, inaccurate stories that are disproven by the end of the week, driving up others’ emotions and concern. These people signal no reflection. They never apologize: they simply share the next emotionally manipulative piece. In this way, they mimic the press we try to analyze. I finally got mad, which is a failure on my part. I fell to rage bait.

I’m not alone. Many are sick of hearing stuff that they can’t believe. The news today feels like a five-star product named “SunZooHappy” that falls apart, and is missing vital screws. The news today is like the award-winning restaurant that serves microwaved slop for a high price. We all feel fooled, and we keep falling for it. Enough.

I might be getting it wrong, too. I definitely fail and fall to frustration, letting myself down. Things happen and we create meaning. We get things wrong in our own lives this way. At a larger scale, if we try to pin down facts, we attempt a chaos theory of nonlinear news: pinning down the wind. The lies are easier to spot, and outline an approximation of truth in their darkness. Most journalists are no better than weathermen using faulty models, tracking which way the wind blows. It’s the ones who seek to control the wind that concern me, blowing you towards the ideology guiding their words. There’s too many lies: we can’t see the truth

Your Current Visibility With Current Events

Be careful: there’s a blizzard out there. Winds swirl snow across our path. With limited visibility, we may veer off the path. Be patient, and you’ll find your way.

~Thanks for Reading!