TRUTH AND POLITICS

TRUTH AND POLITICS

OMAR COLMENARES TRUJILLO

WRITTEN

REGIME OF POST-TRUTH

We have never seen how the truth is being threatened and, curiously, in times of modernization, social networks and all kinds of digital platforms, freedom of expression has put the finger on the trigger against the truth, this is how this interesting article, the post truth, the one that causes so much damage to society.

Politics would not be the same but through information, politics is nurtured and takes on life but with the social networks of the internet, politics has always needed spaces of diffusion and now it is validated through electronic platforms, the boom Of the communications are perhaps one of those spaces, like the radio and the television, is more even some maintain that the power that they had the means of traditional communication, are losing ground.

The Trump example in the United States is a clear example of what the truth post means, and I do not say it simply because of the lies that the president has possibly said, but also the lies to which he has been forced to go influential newspapers like the New York Times or The Washington Post, because it has to be said, in order to achieve political purposes, we resort to the most horrible lie,

The post truth seeks to destroy, harm, undermine the principles and values in a society, does much harm, and especially entering the political arena, the post truth is nothing but infamy and insult, when in order to intimidate the political adversary is he resorts to it, so we are facing a gigantic monster, which succumbs to the ethical standards of a democracy in social networks.

The post-truth is based on false ideas, beliefs and convictions not supported by reliable sources. In this way, the rational argument is no longer the source of the truth but the attractiveness and sensationalism of the published content.

Post-truth politics (also called post-factual politics and post-reality politics) is a political culture in which debate is framed largely by appeals to emotion disconnected from the details of policy, and by the repeated assertion of talking points to which factual rebuttals are ignored. Post-truth differs from traditional contesting and falsifying of facts by relegating facts and expert opinions to be of secondary importance relative to appeal to emotion. While this has been described as a contemporary problem, some observers have described it as a long-standing part of political life that was less notable before the advent of the Internet and related social changes.

As of 2018 political commentators have identified post-truth politics as ascendant in many nations, notably the United States, India, the United Kingdom, Russia, and Brazil, among others. As with other areas of debate, this is being driven by a combination of the 24-hour news cycle, false balance in news reporting, and the increasing ubiquity of social media.

In 2016, post-truth was chosen as the Oxford Dictionaries' Word of the Year, due to its prevalence in the context of that year's Brexit referendum and media coverage of the U.S. presidential election

A defining trait of post-truth politics is that campaigners continue to repeat their talking points, even when media outlets, experts in the field in question, and others provide proof that contradicts these talking points.

A clear example in Colombia is when followers of a leftist leader, Gustavo Petro, insist on describing Álvaro Uribe as a paramilitary and assassin, that is a vicious circle of emotional ideas, from the stomach and not from reason and thought.

In its most extreme mode, post-truth politics can make use of conspiracism. In this form of post-truth politics, false rumors (such as the "birther" or "Muslim" conspiracy theories about Barack Obama) become major news topics.[33] In the case of the "pizzagate" conspiracy, this resulted in a man entering the Comet Ping Pong pizzeria and firing an AR-15 rifle.

Another example in Colombia would be the recent arrival of US planes, the rumor of War with Venezuela was created, some even dared to predict a third world war in the region, which is certainly false, but fulfills the political purpose of making damage to the presidency of Iván Duque, for that reason this phenomenon is so serious, it is densely worrying.

In contrast to simply telling untruths, writers such as Jack Holmes of Esquire describe the process as something different, with Holmes putting it as: "So, if you don't know what's true, you can say whatever you want and it's not a lie".

Social media adds an additional dimension, as user networks can become echo chambers possibly emphasised by the filter bubble where one political viewpoint dominates and scrutiny of claims fails, allowing a parallel media ecosystem of websites, publishers and news channels to develop, which can repeat post-truth claims without rebuttal.In this environment, post-truth campaigns can ignore fact checks or dismiss them as being motivated by bias.The Guardian editor-in-chief Katherine Viner laid some of the blame on the rise of clickbait, articles of dubious factual content with a misleading headline and which are designed to be widely shared, saying that "chasing down cheap clicks at the expense of accuracy and veracity" undermines the value of journalism and truth. In 2016, David Mikkelson, co-founder of the fact checking and debunking site Snopes.com, described the introduction of social media and fake news sites as a turning point, saying "I’m not sure I’d call it a post-truth age but … there’s been an opening of the sluice-gate and everything is pouring through. The bilge keeps coming faster than you can pump.

The rise of post-truth politics coincides with polarized political beliefs. A Pew Research Center study of American adults found that "those with the most consistent ideological views on the left and right have information streams that are distinct from those of individuals with more mixed political views—and very distinct from each other". Data is becoming increasingly accessible as new technologies are introduced to the everyday lives of citizens. An obsession for data and statistics also filters into the political scene, and political debates and speeches become filled with snippets of information that may be misconstrued, false, or not contain the whole picture. Sensationalized television news emphasizes grand statements and further publicizes politicians. This shaping from the media influences how the public views political issues and candidates.

The journalist George Gillett has suggested that the term "post-truth" mistakenly conflates empirical and ethical judgements, writing that the supposedly "post-truth" movement is in fact a rebellion against "expert economic opinion becoming a surrogate for values-based political judgements".

The post-truth is not absolute or universal in nature. It is based on false ideas, beliefs and convictions not supported by reliable sources. In this way, the rational argument is no longer the source of the truth but the attractiveness and sensationalism of the published content. It does not matter that these contents are often simply deceptive.

This phenomenon that goes against the same truth, this phenomenon of lies, is causing serious damage to democracies in the world, damage that of course implies a too perverse way of doing politics, through the sensationalist deception of information.

THANK YOU