There is no shortage of political, social or cultural punditry these days. There is access to news, analysis and commentary 24 hours a day 7 days a week. There is network, cable, radio, traditional print, and internet: and my personal favorite; the guy on the back of the bus. It can be difficult at times to discern between fact and fiction.  The presentation of facts, analysis, and personal opinion can be used to convey real and pertinent information. It can also be used to manipulate, usurp, and distort issues.

     Information is the stuff from which realities are built. Reality is precieved facts of our environment and our precise location in it.  The level of trust (belief) in those facts is directly related to the structural integrity of reality.  Receiving, understanding, synthesizing, and applying information is the process of fact acquisition and testing.  Strong beliefs about environment and location in that environment have several benefits:  Increases the ability to attain needs, fosters feelings of security, reinforces self worth, and promotes empathy and civility. Factual information   is primary to freedom of choice and happiness.

  The obvious flip side to the coin is that misinformation distorts reality. Misinformation is untruths about reality.  Untruths in themselves are innocuous. The acceptance of untruths as fact is antithetical to the structural integrity of reality. Untruths serve to diminish clarity, create specters, disconnect and dislocate. The misinterpretation of environment and location leads to the following:  diminished ability to attain needs, increased feelings of fear, sense of powerlessness, mistrust of others, promotion of alienation and hostility. Misinformation’s end is to deprive choice through the distortion or omission of fact.

     It can be difficult to discern between truth and untruth.  The ability to analyze verbal and written assertion is critical in determining validity. Talking heads, writers, politicians, pastors, supervisors, co-workers and the guy on the bus offer solicited and most times unsolicited assertion ad infinitum.  Their intent many be benevolent or nefarious. The intent of the assertor may be less important then how it is received.  It has been said that” that the road to hell is paved with good intention.”  Gleaning intent is speculative at best. The salient consideration is what the validity of the assertion is?  So then the question is “how is the validity of assertion verified?”

          The internet can be an anchor or a life line depending on its utilization. The good news is that you can check facts.  The internet is over flowing with fact check sites. You can compare the results of several sites on a fact.  Cross checking through the utilization of various sources can eliminate bias and distil out the pure facts. Public records domains, census facts, archived news reports, historical documents, medical facts...etc can be found via a search engine. The beauty of researching others assertions is the peripheral information attained during the process. All verified information can be useful in enlarging a reality.

Fact checking on the internet is dependent on a computer, internet access, familiarity with computer searches, and the time to research. Analysis of assertions is needed on the spot at times. The Greek philosopher Aristotle identified 13 fallacies utilized in assertion of misinformation through speech and writing.    The 13 have been divided into Linguistic Fallacies and Non-linguistic Fallacies.  

• Linguistic fallacies: Linguistic fallacies, or fallacies in the language, are due to the ambiguity of or lack of preciseness in the words or phrases used to express ideas http://www.lyberty.com/encyc/articles/linguistic_fallacies.html

• AccentAmphiboly
• Equivocation
• Composition and Division (two sides of the same coin)
• Figure of Speech

Non-linguistic fallacies:Non-linguistic fallacies are due non-sequential or erroneous premises

• Accident
• Affirming the Consequent
• In a Certain Respect and Simply
• Ignorance of Refutation
• Begging the Question
• False Cause
• Many Questions

List is from http://changingminds.org/disciplines/argument/fallacies/aristotle_fallacies.htm

This list of techniques is used by a variety of persons. For an example of how all of these are used watch Fox News. The host of every Fox News program employs these methods verbally as well flashing fallacious headlines across the bottom as the screen during programming. The following an excerpt from a transcript of the Sean Hannity:

HANNITY: Now, early this morning a 14-year-old boy was chased down a Chicago street and beaten with a pipe. Now, his injuries sent him to the hospital, where he remains in critical condition. Now, this event occurs on the heels of the murder of Derrion Albert, the 16-year-old honor student who was beaten to death in a gang fight, and at the same time the president is lobbying to bring the Olympics to Chicago, which begs the question: Is this a city where we want the Olympics taking place?

This piece is fraught with devices to provide information in a way that evoke negative emotions and reaches erroneous conclusions. The facts presented were that two incidents of violence happened in Chicago. The President was lobbying to bring the Olympics to Chicago. Hannity then suggest that the two incidents beg the question: Is this a city where we want the Olympics taking place?

Appeals to Emotion, False Conclusions, Unrepresentative Sample.

http://mediamatters.org/research/200910020003

1. The incidents of violence that were reported are tragic and regrettable but are not unique to the city of Chicago. Chicago is the connection that he tries to use to make a statement about the Presidents judgment in general.

2. In fact the City that received the bid, Rio, has its share of violent crime as well.  

3. He attempt to make a link between the Presidents’s lobbying efforts and the events. There are none.

4. In fact Hannity began his assertion that one of the incidents had happened early that morning. The president had already arrived in Copenhagen. How can events that have not happened be taken into account.

5. Hannity implies that the Presidents that the President is unaware of dangerous situations.

6. Hannity adds up unrelated facts and states they beg a question, but they do not.

7. Hannity’s blatantly exploits a national problem of youth violence by connecting it to a patriotic effort by the president to get the Olympics in America.

8. Hannity concludes by asking the leading question: Is this a city where we want the Olympics taking place? He has made assertions about the entirety of the city based on two recent incidents.

     This is the type of faulty logic and presentation of information that can lead people to distorted views about the president, blacks, and the city of Chicago. Critical thinking is the key to deciphering toxic messages which can make your reality bitter, fearful, dark, and cold.