Truth Decay (book)

Depiction of a young woman being strip-searched by imposing Spanish policemen (Illustrator: Frederic Remington)

First, the authors identify the 1880s–1890s as the “Gilded Age”. This historical era commenced after the American civil war and was punctuated by the industrialisation of America.  Indeed, the introduction of printing technology increased the output of newspaper publishers. This stimulated competition within the newspaper publishing industry.  In New York City, major newspaper publishers Joseph Pulitzer and William Hearst engaged in “yellow journalism” by deploying a sensationalist style of covering politics, world events and crime in order to fend off competitors and attract market share.[3]  However, the authors note that these publishers also deployed “yellow journalism” to advance the partisan political objectives of their respective news organisations.[9]  For example, in April 1898, the New York Journal owned by Hearst published a number of articles with bold headlines, violent images and aggrandised information to position the Cuban’s as ‘innocent’ people being ‘persecuted by the illiberal Spanish’ regime and thereby emphasise the propriety of America’s intervention in the Spanish-American War to the audience.  Thus, “yellow journalism” caused a conflation of opinions and objectively verifiable facts in society.

Second, the authors identify the 1920s–1930s as the “Roaring Twenties and the Great Depression”. This historical era was renowned as another period of economic growth and development that catalysed significant changes in the American media industry.  The authors argue that radio broadcasting and tabloid journalism emerged as a dramatised form of media that focused on news surrounding public figures such as politicians, actors, musicians and sports athletes as entertainment rather than reliable and accurate information for the audience to utilise in considered decision-making.[3]  As such, “jazz journalism” is alleged to have amplified the conflation of opinions and objectively verifiable facts in society.  

Third, the authors identify the 1960s–1970s as the period of “civil rights and social unrest”. This historical era was punctuated by America’s involvement in the Vietnam War.  Television news was used to disseminate information which portrayed the appropriateness and success of America’s involvement in the Vietnam War to the audience.  Kavanagh and Rich argue that this increasingly conflated opinion and objective facts to advance partisan objectives.[3] However, the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s contributed to a transformation in news reporting.  Journalists began to deploy first-person narration in their reporting of world events to illuminate the inequities faced by African American citizens who strived for recognition and civil rights. On its face, this incidence of “new journalism” increased the risk of reporters imbuing their work with personal biases.[10]  Nonetheless, Bainer suggests that “new journalism” also augmented reporting as it permitted journalists to disseminate information on matters without the hollow pretence of objective reporting.[11]  

The Cognitive Bias Codex

First, cognitive prejudices are described as systematic errors in rational thinking that transpire when individuals are absorbing information. That is, individuals have a propensity to identify and prioritise information that supports their pre-existing worldview.[12]  This has a number of impacts on the process of individual decision-making.[12]  The authors argue that individuals consciously or unconsciously employ motivated reasoning to resist accepting information that challenges their pre-existing worldview.[13] This causes the interface with invalidating information to further ingrain the partisan opinions of individuals. It is alleged by the authors that, in the long term, cognitive prejudices have created “political, sociodemographic, and economic polarisation” as individuals form cliques that are diametrically opposed in their worldview and communication, thereby attenuating the quality civil discourse in American society.[14]   

Second, the transformation of information systems refers to the surge in the “volume and speed of news” that is disseminated to individuals.  The authors note that the move towards a “24-hour news cycle” has increased the number of competitors to traditional news organisations.[3] This competition, it is said, has reduced profitability and compelled news organisations such as ABC and Fox to pivot from costly investigative journalism to sensationalised opinion as a less-costly method of attracting an audience.[3]  The increase in the quantity of opinion rather than objectively discernible fact in reporting is further exacerbated by the introduction of social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook. These social media platforms facilitate rapid access to, and dissemination of, opinion news to millions of users. Nonetheless, Keane suggests that the rise of social media allows state power to be publicly scrutinised by citizens, thereby dispersing power and improving overall accountability.[15]  However, Molina notes that online news must nevertheless be distilled from the increasing volume of misinformation and disinformation that is disseminated online as it is contributing to Truth Decay.[16]  

U.S. Federal Budget Deficit from 2018 to 2027

Third, cuts to the educational sector are alleged to have catalysed a reduction in the critical thinking and preservice media literacy education of individuals. Kavanagh and Rich argue that individuals utilise the information and critical thinking skills established in traditionally authoritative sites of discourse such as secondary schools and universities to make decisions.[3]  However, financial constraints associated with the swelling federal budget deficit from 2010 to 2021 have precipitated cuts to the funding apportioned to the American education sector.  The authors argue that this has meant that, in the face of the increasing volume of online news, less students have acquired the technical and emotional skills to identify the explicit and implicit biases of reporters and thereby critically assess the accuracy and reliability of information emanating from sources such as the government and media.[17]  Ranschaert uses data gained through a longitudinal study of social studies teacher to argue that the decline in individuals relying on teachers for authoritative information has serious implications for ability of the education system to act as a buffer against Truth Decay.[17]  The authors go further than Ranschaert by arguing that, in the long term, this has resulted in a constituency that is vulnerable to absorbing and promoting misinformation as the skill to delineate objective facts from misinformation has atrophied.  In that context, the disparity between the preservice media literacy education of students and the challenges posed by internet technology is said to engender Truth Decay.[17]

First, it is alleged that truth decay manifests in the deterioration of civil discourse in modern American society.[3]  The authors define civil discourse as vigorous dialogue that attempts to promote the public interest.[3]  It follows that, in the absence of a baseline set of objective facts, the ability for individuals and politicians to meaningfully listen and engage in a constructive dialogue about economics, science and policy is diminished.[18]  This concern is echoed by Leskes who notes that, in the long term, the erosion of civil discourse degrades the quality and efficiency of policy-making at the federal level, thereby engendering costs to the economy.[18]  

Second, Truth Decay is alleged to manifest in “political paralysis”.[3]  The authors note that the deterioration of civil discourse and increasing dispute about objective facts has created a deep chasm between conservative and liberal politicians in America.[3]  Indeed, a case study on the increasing use of the Filibuster in U.S. Congress between 1947 and 2017 is used to suggest that Truth Decay has culminated in conservative and liberal politicians being increasingly unable to compromise on a range of policy initiatives. This incurs short term economic costs for the U.S. economy as the government becomes rigid an unable to respond promptly to domestic crises that require direct intervention.  For example, America’s federal government was halted in 2013 due to the inability of the Senate to pass the Affordable Care Act. The lack of appropriated funds resulted in the federal government being unable to contract and expend moneys in the administration of the public service.  Ultimately, this resulted in $24 billion loss to the economy.[19]  In the long term, however, political immobility  also causes federal governments to drop in international standing.  

Third, Truth Decay is alleged to have engendered the withdrawal of individuals from institutional sites of discourse.[3] The authors argue that the decrease of faith in education institutions, media and government among young voters aged between 18 and 29 precipitated the consistent decrease in the overall number of votes cast in the U.S federal election from 2004 to 2016.[3] This decrease in the exercise of civic responsibility through voting may, in the long run, diminish the ability of citizens to scrutinise state power, thereby diminishing policy making and overall accountability.[15]