Social Media and Pavlov's dog

 I have to admit that social media fascinates me. The ability to communicate with people across the globe, it really does have a valid purpose. Alas, that valid purpose has degraded a lit over the last few years. People sharing poorly researched or slanted alleged "news" articles. Post memes that have no grounding in fact. And then in the same breath, many of these same folks get upset that the likes of Facebook and Twitter don't do a better job to prevent the spread of misinformation. All along, these folks don't grasp they are the ones with that power to begin with.

Anyone who follows me on my personal Facebook page, or on Twitter (@HandsomeRandall, by the way) realized quite quickly that I don't share a lot of links to news sites unless I vet them first. Or I trust the actual source of the information. I cringe when I see someone share links to Newsmax or Breitbart as if those agencies reported actual facts. if anything, they serve as public relations firms for conservative causes and voices. Happy tossing out what ever facts don't fit their narrative in order to achieve a Pavlov like response from their target audience. Alternet comes dangerously close to tossing aside the straight narrative for an editorial one with some of their articles. Unless the site has my full faith, I don't share the article, it's that simple. 

I get that in today's world, taking some time to do quick research as to the validity of an article is a tough ask. Most find it easier to just click the share button and go on their merry way. Especially if it fits that narrative, once again brings up back to Ivan Pavlov and his dogs. Instead of the bell which conditioned the dogs to expect to find food, now its news articles conditioned to affirm a person's beliefs. 

It is rather maddening to assume we are utterly powerless in stopping the spread of misinformation on social media, and that the social media companies alone are the ones to solve the issue. Which brings us to Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green. Shortly after the first of the year, Twitter permanently disabled her personal account. For the last year, maybe more, she'd been spreading misinformation regarding COVID. Social media companies like Twitter (and to a lesser extent Facebook, which seems generally disinterested in the idea) announced they were going to crack down on the spread of misinformation. The result was many accounts being restricted or shut down entirely. Instead of owning up to spreading falsehoods, Greene turned her focus on Twitter and cried that she was being censored. Not to be outdone, Lauren Boebert tweeted in defense of Greene, proclaiming that when Republicans regain control, social media outlets like Twitter would "pay" for their actions, causing many to believe that Boebert was advocating that all social media platforms be placed under government control, and that only government approved post could appear. A rather frightening concept indeed, but Boebert is a devout follower of Donald Trump and many times while in office, Trump expressed a desire to extend government control over the media, which included the ability to pull a license from any outlet that did not write favorably of him. So, it's not a wild notion that Boebert wasn't advocating violence, but full government control over social media. 

Had Greene used common sense and not re-tweeted misinformation, she'd still have her personal account. Instead, she opted for political gamesmanship. Sharing of misinformation gets people hurt, it could very well get them killed. Spreading misinformation regarding COVID, at a time where hospitals are having to delay surgeries, and essentially teeter on rationing care, is dangerous. You can't spread COVID misinformation and proclaim you care about the front-line workers in the hospitals without sounding like hypocrite. 

There have been many calls on Facebook and Twitter to stop the spread. It has reached the point where the CEO's of the companies had been called to testify before congress. And the sad fact is that we didn't have to get to that point. The grim fact as I stated before is that we have to gaze into the mirror and accept the fact that we played a role in the spread, the wide spread as it were, of misinformation. Getting upset at Facebook is not going to change that. Both social media and many of its users have played a role in the spread of misinformation. 

So this is the next step. It's 2022, a brand-new year. Time to adopt a new approach. Instead of blindly sharing a meme or a random post, so a quick study. And get out of your comfort zone. That means bypassing the usual websites with their slanted views. It means actually going to google and researching valid websites. Not that I mean this as a plug, like I did my Twitter handle, but I swear by Factcheck.org. They are non-partisan. They don't have a political axe to grind. And they back-up their articles with links, so that you are getting just the facts, man. 

This is the call to action, the call to change. Tired that a social media company isn't stopping the spread of misinformation, do something. Stop sharing memes and links just because it fits your narrative. Do some true honest research. And if the original post comes from a group that appears to have a political agenda, then don't share the post, it's as simple as that. The power is yours. Use it. All of this almost makes me miss the days where you got an annoying message from a friend asking if you could spare some animals for their farm in Farmville. Almost. 

You Can't Yell Fire in A Crowded Theater

 In America, we have freedom of speech. It was something that was put into our Constitution by the Founding Fathers because they did not want to see people jailed for speaking out against the government. They had seen that enough when the country was a colony under British rule and even Great Britan itself. They had seen the dangers, but also knew that freedom of speech wasn't an exact. As the old saying goes, you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater if there's no fire. The founders also knew that freedom had to extend to the press as well. Something that will be covered elsewhere in this blog.

This brings us to Lauren Boebert, the Republican representative from Colorado. Boebert seems to get emotionally aroused spew hatred. She also seems to get that way when she talks about her Patriotism, as she talks about the flag in such glowing terms you'd think she'd birthed the flag herself. Boebert's dark side has been on display since she stepped foot in Washington, swept in by conservatives seeking outsiders, even if they spewed racist terms. Boebert enjoys attacking anyone who speaks ill of Donald Trump. She also seems to relish asserting falsehoods about members of congress, especially IIhan Omar, a Democratic representative from the state of Minnesota. Boebert recently was given a pulpit on Fox News, a network notorious for playing fast and loose with the facts, often casting them aside to appease their audience. Boebert insisted that Omar is a terrorist, despite having zero evidence to back the claim. She's called Omar, New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley from Massachusetts as the "Jihad Squad", despite the fact that Ocasio-Cortez and Pressley are not Muslim. It's a cute phrase that plays well with her target base, a group seeking any reason to despise anyone from the Middle East. However, it has zero basis in reality. 

When Rep. Omar called Boebert seeking an apology, she was rebuffed, to which Boebert took to social media to once again air baseless claims that Omar is a terrorist. And that led to Omar to play for the public voice messages she has received, essentially threatening her with assassination. Rep. Marjorie Taylor-Greene, who cheered on rioters as they attempted to overthrow the U.S. Government in an actual attempt to terrorize the public and Congress itself, cheered on her friend Boebert. 

Boebert is free to say what she wants, but she's not free from repercussions from her words. Rep. Oman would be justified in suing for libel. One could even argue that Boebert's words are a call to raise arms against anyone from the Middle East. Boebert is essentially yelling "fire" in a public space and enjoying the panic that ensues. And Boebert's words aren't just limited to Rep. Omar. Boebart has called for the public to ignore the advice of Dr. Fauci in dealing with the COVID virus. Setting aside the fact that Fauci is an expert with several degrees and Boebert's medical knowledge comes from what she sees on Grey's Anatomy. Well, maybe that's a little too high brow for her. And the whole idea of showing compassion for others might make her physically ill. Let's just say when it comes to medical and scientific knowledge, Boebert is several steps below Dr. Nick Riveria. And her words about ignoring COVID protocols by claiming her freedoms are being infringed upon is actually getting people killed. It does make a nice sound bite for her base though. 

Now we're going to talk about freedom of the press, and it will tie into everything about Boebert. There are standards when it comes to the press, they simply cannot print whatever they like and be free from repercussions. Boebert, for all her bluster about free speech, has expressed support for Donald Trump, who by the way, is not a fan of a free press, which is why he chose Mike Pence to be his running mate when he ran for office. Pence, as governor of Indiana, attempted to establish "Indiana Today", was he claimed would tell the citizens of Indiana the last happenings in the state. It was, in reality, a state run media outlet that only ran favorable pieces about the state under Pence's control. Nothing could be aired that did not speaking in glowing terms of Pence and his administration. Indiana Today was later the subject of a lawsuit and was shut down, as the courts rightfully ruled that state run media outlets were not in good faith with state powers. To be honest, state run media is typically a feature of places like China and the Philippines, the later of whom Trump praised their leader, President Duterte on how he handles the unfavorable press. Just so were clear, Duterte is not a fan of freedom of the press, and has held public executions of journalist who dare print the truth. Trump himself has shown he feels freedom of the press needs to be chilled. He called upon the FCC to revoke the license of outlets such as CNN and MSNBC because they weren't airing news that painted him in glowing terms. He would even assert false claims that a news outlet was dying, like he did several times with the New York Times and Washington Post. 

Boebert is attempting to use her freedom of speech to draw hatred to a group simply over their religious beliefs. She does this under the cloak of being a patriot. Freedom of speech is a wonder thing and it one of the aspects that makes this country great. The danger comes when the likes of Boebert pervert into something unnatural. Something is sued to fuel hatred and bigotry. In the end, Boebert is no different than the racist orator in the film Don't Be A Sucker. Difference is that was just a film and any havoc that came from his speech would be contained in the film. Boebert's hate speech has gone unchecked and it won't be long before her words inspire someone to act with tragic consequences. I just hope it never comes to that.