The New York Times - USA (2020-10-26)

A22 MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2020

N

TO THE EDITOR: I was touched by Rob Henderson’s cogent reflection on and apprecia- tion for the outsized role TV played in forming his understanding of America’s elite culture and en- abling him to navigate it (“I’m Not Rich, I Just Watch a Lot of TV,” Sunday Review, Oct. 11). His essay made me grateful for all such external stimuli that ex- pand my world, whether comic books (which I devoured as a kid), newspapers, books, movies, art, music or, yes, even TV.

ADDY WHITEHOUSE WAUKESHA, WIS.

TO THE EDITOR: When I was growing up as a lower- middle-class kid in an Alabama cotton town, necessity often dic- tated that I successfully navigate worlds as disparate as those of sharecroppers and gentry. With parents from backgrounds a rung below even mine and my siblings’, I realized early on that to learn the spoken and unspoken languages of the worldly and educated, I was going to need tutors. So I had a smile on my face as I read Rob Henderson’s essay af- firming that my consciously at- tempting to adopt the quick wit, eloquent delivery and confidence

of television characters like Hawk- eye Pierce and Alex P. Keaton hadn’t been such a bad idea after all. These characters enhanced my perspective on “the educated” and added to the chorus of other voices in my life that were encouraging aspiration to more than just finan- cial success. The essay left me recommitted to the inherent value in perpetually examining what I want, what I do and why I do it.

PAUL COLSON, BIRMINGHAM, ALA.

TO THE EDITOR: If only we could learn what moti- vates some people to look beyond themselves and to aspire to do more than what life seems to offer them, as Rob Henderson did. His story certainly shows impressive accomplishments, and if it was television that inspired him, so be it. The turn-on can come from so many different sources — sports, an individual role model, even comic books. The important ele- ment is learning, and eventually recognizing that education is the key to success for anyone, regard- less of one’s social or economic background. MIRIAM KAGAN MARGOSHES HASTINGS-ON-HUDSON, N.Y.

The TV Window to Other Worlds

LETTERS

TO THE EDITOR: “Undoing Trump’s Immigration Policies” (editorial, Oct. 11) is correct: It will take years to repair the damage the Trump administration has done to our immigration system. The editorial also says, “If Democrats were to take control of Congress and the White House next year, it would be fairly simple to undo some of the damage.” A future administration can work with Congress to pass the Dream Act; update the registry date so that undocumented immi- grants of good moral character residing here since a specific year (now 1972!) can become legal permanent residents; and raise the refugee ceiling. Even without Congress, a new administration can reopen the Central American Minors Program and roll back every Trump administration immigration regulation and policy, including so-called safe third country agreements and “Remain in Mexico.” Make America greet again.

MARK HETFIELD SILVER SPRING, MD. The writer is the president and chief executive of the Jewish refugee group HIAS.

A Redo on Immigration

TO THE EDITOR: Re “To Beat Trump, Mock Him,” by Nicholas Kristof (column, Sept. 27): I love “The Daily Show” or “The Colbert Report” as much as anyone, but I think that the suggestion to mock President Trump is un- wise. The American political cli- mate is saturated with satire and mockery. It hasn’t made a dent in Mr. Trump’s base. Mockery can be cathartic, but it also divides. There has been plenty of mockery among Americans in the last four years, and not nearly enough respect or compassion.

When the left mocks Mr. Trump, too often his voters are mocked as well. That doesn’t win anyone over.

MEG EDWARDS, COLUMBUS, OHIO

TO THE EDITOR: I am a political cartoonist — one of those people whom Nicholas Kristof praises in his column and, not incorrectly, identifies as an “endangered species.” Today there are many talented cartoonists hard at work, despite the challenge to our industry. It’s high time The Times gets back in the game and recognizes that cartooning is a unique, power- ful art form — and begins publish- ing cartoons regularly again. Editorial cartoons, at their best, offer succinct, focused commen- tary with a visual component that is tailor-made for the era we’re in since they can easily go viral online. WARD SUTTON, FORT COLLINS, COLO. The writer was the 2018 recipient of the Herblock Prize for editorial cartooning.

TO THE EDITOR: Nicholas Kristof is spot on in re- minding us that mocking President Trump is the best possible strategy. The mockery of Hitler by Charlie Chaplin in “The Great Dictator” and by Mel Brooks in “The Producers” is a testament to that idea. Chaplin is gone, but it is not too late to add Mr. Brooks to Joe Biden’s team!

I. MILTON KARABELL, PHILADELPHIA

TO THE EDITOR: To beat President Trump, mock him? Nothing easier! Simply make a video of Mr. Trump’s gaffes, malapropisms, absurdities, taste- less utterances, vulgarities, false- hoods, etc., and play them over and over. His own words should do the job.

EMILY PERL KINGSLEY BRIARCLIFF MANOR, N.Y.

Humor as a Political Weapon Against Trump

I

NCREASINGLY, friends, colleagues
and readers share the same story
with me: Online, somebody they
know and love has stumbled into the
treacherous world of online conspiracy
theories and, in some cases, might not
even know it. I’m often asked: How do
you talk to people you care about who
might be on the precipice of or headed
down the conspiratorial rabbit hole?
It’s a question without an easy answer,
but one we need to ask with increasing
urgency. I decided to ask some scholars
and researchers about best practices.
Their answers are helpful — but more
than that, they illustrate the depth of the
problem. Conspiracy theories (like Piz-
zagate and now QAnon, anti-vaccine
claims, disinformation around the co-
ronavirus suggesting the virus was engi-
neered in a laboratory) are a chronic con-
dition that will long outlive the 2020 elec-
tion. Given our reliance on social plat-
forms to connect and process news, we
need a way to manage their inevitable
presence in our lives, rather than naïvely
hold out hope for a magical cure.
Reminder: This advice pertains to
friends or relatives with whom you are
already close and who are not demon-
strating unstable or violent behavior. It’s
important to exercise restraint and good
judgment in all cases.

ASK WHERE THE INFORMATION IS
COMING FROM

Whitney Phillips, a communications
scholar at Syracuse University who
studies misinformation, rhetoric and in-
formation systems, suggested talking
about the way the internet works.
“If I were confronted by a 60-year-old
relative that I love who is sharing worry-
ing things, I’d open a conversation by
getting them to talk about information.
I’d non-defensively ask them, ‘Do you
know how Google works?’ ‘What do you
think my news feed looks like? Do you
know why yours looks that way?’ ” Ms.
Phillips told me. “So many people think
this technology is magic or the natural
state of how information moves. But it’s
not. It’s designed this way. And if people
better understood the mechanisms and
the economics, maybe then you can talk
about the content.”
Her aim is to give people an under-
standing of their information envi-
ronment. She argues that this is espe-
cially important with older social media
users who may not be well versed in the
way platforms use recommendation al-
gorithms and create environments like
filter bubbles. “If people really knew how
these platforms worked or how much
money they generate, they’d be more
wary,” she said. “I would not advocate re-
placing one conspiracy theory with an-
other, but if these people are already
wary of authority, it’s worth asking them
questions like, ‘Whose interest does your
online engagement serve?’ ”

CREATE SOME COGNITIVE DISSONANCE

In a recent article, Colin Dickey, an au-
thor and academic who has spent time

writing about conspiracy theories, argued that his first step is to acknowledge that some conspiracies do exist — Water- gate, the Catholic Church’s sexual abuse scandals, the billionaire Jeffrey Epstein’s network of underage sexual abuse. This, he argues, creates a bit of common ground and lays the foundation to ex- plore how unproven conspiracy theories differ from reality. “I try to show how these conspiracies play out,” he told me. “I say, ‘I don’t know if you’re right or wrong, but if you were right, I would expect the following to happen.’ I explain how, in past conspiracies, there is usually some whistle- blower or news report, and then the whole thing unravels quickly. Witnesses come forward, then victims. And journal- ists circle like sharks to get the story. I try to get them to think about concrete things and logistical details, including the bureaucracy that’s required to main- tain these vast alleged plots.” Mr. Dickey says he doesn’t expect his inquiry to change minds outright. In-

stead, the idea is to introduce a little bit of doubt or cognitive dissonance into a conspiratorial thinker’s framework. He de- scribed the approach as similar to the way water finds its way into tiny cracks of a building’s foundation and then freezes and thaws, expanding and con- tracting to slowly widen the fissures. “Sometimes it’s about turning the ‘do your research’ paradigm back on them,” he said. “I never appeal to authorities like the government or mainstream media, but I subtly imply that what they’re saying doesn’t match the historical record, which works better than outright dismissing them.”

DEBUNKING IS DIFFICULT Because conspiracy theories become fused with people’s political and cultural identities, debating a true believer can be counterproductive. “While debunking or fact-checking are valuable, they aren’t going to move someone who feels a sense of significance through absorbing and promoting esoteric but baseless theories,” says Travis View, a host of the QAnon Anonymous podcast, which has tracked the movement since its early days. Constantly fact-checking conspiracy theories can harden the other side’s views or make people feel attacked. It’s also a quick way to grow exhausted and give up. Asking questions tends to be more productive.

DON’T DEBATE ON FACEBOOK You’re most likely to run into a friend or relative sharing conspiratorial content online. Unfortunately, social platforms are often the worst forum for talking about these thorny issues. In many cases, a face-to-face conversation is a better place to voice your concerns. This, of course, might be impossible

during a pandemic, but phone calls or video chats are better than an argument in someone’s Facebook thread. A few of the experts I spoke with suggested that private discussions allow people to let their guard down and abandon any per- formative social media behaviors. They can also allow participants to pick up on subtle facial and body language expres- sions — or tone of voice — that may dis- solve tensions. “It’s helpful to construct a situation where you can gauge their re- sponse in real time and be dynamic in your approach to hedge against defen- siveness and keep them at ease,” Mr. Dickey said.

MOCKING AND SCOLDING DON’T WORK Everyone I’ve talked to starts with the same advice: Don’t be a scold. Be gentle, compassionate and patient. “I always tell people that if they’re going to talk to somebody who has gone down this road, they shouldn’t argue with them about it and they should try not to get heated trying to debunk information,” Mike Rothschild, a conspiracy theory researcher who is working on a book on the QAnon movement, told me in August. Mr. Dickey echoed Mr. Rothschild. “The first lesson that I learned the hard way is not to dismiss them outright,” he said. “People adopt conspiratorial thinking because it aligns with a core facet of their identity.” Mr. Dickey told me that in his early conversations with friends who had fallen for fringe theories, he was overly aggressive. “Because I went right at these core parts of their identities they felt like I was attacking them personally. So I had to find a way to make it seem not like a personal attack.” Travis View suggested approaching conspiracy theorists “with the same pity and compassion you might show someone who chooses to stay in a destructive relationship.” He argued that those who’ve found community and purpose in these movements “really don’t see that they’re going down the wrong path because they don’t understand that there are better options.”

KNOW WHEN TO WALK AWAY People should be very careful choosing when to intervene. It is not a good idea to confront people who seem deeply, per- haps irretrievably, consumed by conspiratorial thinking or who are acting errat- ically or violently. If you have legitimate concerns about their health and safety, that is usually a job for professionals. “It’s a real case-by-case basis for me,” Mr. Dickey said about his decision to talk with those who are radicalized. “I usually only do it if I feel that I have the social cache or kinship to be a lifeline to them. And if they are not too far gone.” In some cases, it’s important to realize there may be little you can do in the mo- ment, some cautioned. “If you have to, be ready to walk away from them,” Mr. Rothschild told me. “There comes a point where you may not be able to have that instability in your life.” 0

Talking About Conspiracy Theories

ILLUSTRATION BY JENNIFER HEUER; PHOTOGRAPHS BY GETTY

CHARLIE WARZELis an Opinion writer at large.

Charlie Warzel

How to help friends

and family headed down

this online rabbit hole.

TO THE EDITOR: Re “The Encroachment of the Unsayable,” by Bret Stephens (column, Oct. 20): In his otherwise thoughtful and important piece on the limits writers face today, Mr. Stephens does- n’t mention pressures far more common than religious fundamen- talism. The writers I know, novelists especially, are so terrified of writing something that might be deemed offensive — because of “cultural appropriation,” “other- ing” or race and gender sensitiv- ities — that, as Bruce Springsteen once said of poets, they “don’t write nothin’ at all.” It has become next to impossible, for one example, to put on the page an evil character who belongs to a marginalized or oppressed group. Novels are symphonies of the imagination, and deal primari- ly with the magnificent uniqueness of the individual — Jane Eyre, Bigger Thomas, Gatsby — and, while they may have a political impact, they should not be read, or judged, as pamphlets. We are killing democracy, yes,

one timid book after the next. And among other negative conse- quences, this crippling of the imagination has hampered our ability to see each other, beyond the labels, as human beings.

ROLAND MERULLO, CONWAY, MASS. The writer is the author of 16 novels.

TO THE EDITOR: What a wonderful set of contrasts among your Opinion writers. While Bret Stephens worries that writers are feeling constrained from insult- ing Muslims, Michelle Goldberg reports on how Republicans are happily spreading Russian disinformation to attack Joe Biden (“Is the Trump Campaign Colluding Again?”), and Scott Wiener, a member of the California State Senate, reports on how many mainstream Republicans are happily feeding QAnon’s violent ex- tremism (“When QAnon Came for Me”). Maybe some things are best left unsaid, and maybe the bigger threat is from the Republicans than from the liberals. RICHARD DINE, SILVER SPRING, MD.

Writers’ Self-Censorship for Fear of Giving Offense

.

The New York Times - USA (2020-10-26)

I

Get our desktop app

Company

Features

Documentation

Resources