Caution: Albuterol fueled rant ahead

I had a lot of thoughts and made a lot of connections leading up to and during this class. I’m pretty sure they have a lot to do with confirmation bias, mainly because I had thought them before reading the articles discussing conservatives versus liberals, which happened to be in line with my previous thoughts. While the information in the articles was in line with what I already believed, I’m not sure that is entirely due to confirmation bias. When you have several studies that conclude with the same general theme, you have a strong argument for being correct – in terms of scientific evidence. There is a difference between thinking you are right because that is what YOU “know” – whether or not a bunch of people share your same opinion, and the information being literally correct.

In many of the presentations, the same general themes were reappearing. Conservatives have a tendency to distrust the media. Further, not only do they distrust the media more as a whole, they distrust the more reputable and trusted media even more than the much less reputable and trustworthy media. Liberals, while also subject to confirmation bias, have a tendency to trust the more reputable and trustworthy media. They are also more likely to get their information from more sources. Conservatives are more prone to believing the first thing they hear, and are more likely to double down on the belief of that information after it has been confirmed as false – even when the admission of disseminating the false information comes from the same source that told them the first (false) thing. So, I’m thinking that that doesn’t entirely qualify as confirmation bias. Conservatives are more likely to converse and maintain relationships with only people who share their views. Liberals are more likely to converse with a wider diversity of people. In short, liberals are more realistic and diverse. Like I said, this is likely bias, no matter the form. These just happen to be my connections.

I know that I tweeted this, but I also wanted to elaborate on it further. I had a basic gist of the general public’s definition of fake news. Admittedly, I largely ignored anything that someone said that contained the words “fake news” because I was sick of it. It’s all a bunch of distraction and fodder to divide us as much as possible. For, if we are divided, and kept hostile toward each other about small picture stuff, as well as being entertained (celebrity gossip and sports games on the news), we are too busy to see what is really going on with the government/powers that be and hold them accountable. See. My personal definition of “fake news” is the junk that passes for news on most news stations. The next celebrity couple getting together/breaking up/having a baby/naming the baby; Martha Stewart’s dogs; sports games/sports scores/what athlete is injured/how much money an athlete makes, etc. is that REALLY news? Is that REALLY important information? I’m thinking, in a world where Martha Stewart’s dogs won out over Arab Spring, that cannot afford to be news! This junk skews our view of what is important. Further, it is a distraction. A distraction from the fact that 4 families control 80% of the WORLD’S money. People all over the world, including the U.S. are starving, while 2% of people have 18 cars, personal jets, etc. I will make a small caveat about how much money an athlete makes not being news. It is news only in the fact that it shines light on the massive divide of people. Why do athletes, movie stars, general billionaires (whether earned or born into it) need all that money all to themselves? I realize I am a little off topic, but I will get back around to it.

The answer to that question lies partly in the fact of just how individualistic we are as a culture. See, something as simple as “thedress” is a great illustration. That dress divided the nation almost as much as the 2016 election did. Even though, yes, there was technically a right answer to the color of the dress, it didn’t change the honesty and surety of the people who saw it as white and gold. It brought a new player to the game. Perspective. Just like my 4 year old that saw a six from one end of the game board while my other 4 year old saw a 9 – try explaining THAT one to 2 four year olds! Perspective. Again. There could technically be a right answer; the person who wrote it had a specific intention for that number, or 6 was the highest this game piece went – making a 9 impossible. It didn’t change the honesty and surety of my 4 year old that saw the 9. He was SURE he was correct and his brother was wrong. Everything in our lives, from birth, is set up as a competition. Black and white; right and wrong; winner and loser. Even the simplest of games, there has to be a winner. No one sees an option where everyone “wins”. Their billions of dollars, jets, and 18 cars are theirs; who cares if you are starving? They are winning the game of life; therefore, you aren’t their problem. You probably deserve it because you probably did it to yourself.