elpais.com
2025: A Year of Political Manipulation and Misinformation
In 2025, the spread of misinformation in the US, Argentina, and parts of Europe has created a crisis of truth, mirroring historical events like the Galileo affair, where correcting misinformation can take centuries.
- What solutions or strategies does the author propose to counter the spread of misinformation?
- The author suggests that progressive intellectuals need to devise new methods to reach those who are deeply entrenched in misinformation, moving beyond rational arguments, as these are ineffective against intentional manipulation.
- What is the central problem highlighted in the article regarding the spread of misinformation?
- The core issue is the widespread dissemination of false narratives in various countries, hindering rational discourse and effective governance. This is exemplified by the manipulation of facts to attack political figures, similar to historical examples of truth suppression.
- How does the author compare the current situation to historical instances of truth suppression?
- The author draws a parallel between the current crisis of misinformation and the Galileo affair, emphasizing how long it took to correct the Church's false claims. This highlights the potential for long-term damage from unchecked misinformation.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The author frames the current state of the world in 2025 as a "pandemic of stupidity," setting a negative and dramatic tone from the start. This immediately positions the reader to agree with the author's critical perspective. The comparison to Galileo's condemnation by the Church further reinforces this negative framing, implying a parallel between past injustices and present-day misinformation. The use of strong emotional language like "abismo tenebroso" (dark abyss) and descriptions like being "intoxicated to the marrow" strongly influences the reader's perception of the described events.
Language Bias
The text uses highly charged and subjective language. Terms like "pandemic of stupidity," "tenebroso abismo" (dark abyss), "desvaríos" (ravings), and "intoxicated to the marrow" are not neutral and express strong negative opinions. The author also uses loaded terms like "tertulianos de derechas" (right-wing commentators) and "estrategas mendaces" (mendacious strategists), which immediately positions these groups negatively without presenting evidence. Neutral alternatives could include terms such as 'misinformation,' 'challenges to truth,' 'political discourse,' and 'disagreements.'
Bias by Omission
The analysis omits the perspectives of the groups criticized, such as right-wing commentators or the strategists mentioned. While the author acknowledges that some people believe misinformation, there is no attempt to understand their reasoning or perspective. This omission makes it difficult to assess the extent and nature of the problem and prevents a balanced presentation.
False Dichotomy
The text presents a false dichotomy between "rational arguments" and "intoxication" by suggesting that only one side is engaged in rational discussion. It implies that anyone who believes misinformation is beyond reason and incapable of being persuaded by facts. This oversimplification ignores the complexity of human belief systems and the various factors that may contribute to the acceptance of misinformation.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the spread of misinformation and the inability of rational arguments to counter it. This impacts negatively on Quality Education as it points to a failure in educating citizens to critically assess information and resist manipulation. The inability to distinguish credible sources from misinformation hinders informed decision-making and effective participation in democratic processes, undermining the goals of quality education.