AWA: Academic Writing at Auckland

A recent article in New Scientist magazine addressed the issue of erroneous beliefs that persist in society, asking; "Why are so many people refusing to accept what the evidence is telling them?" (35). It gives several examples in which incorrect convictions are prevalent, including 9/11, the 'theory' of evolution and climate change. In these and other instances, some people insist on clinging to views counter to what scientific research has concluded. A related phenomenon is the trust some people place in particular pieces of knowledge, while not allowing conflicting information to intrude. The questions I would like to address in this research paper are: Has the Internet-age accelerated the spread of incorrect or circular beliefs? Implicit in this question is its opposite; has the Internet actually aided in expanding insight due to the ease at which information can be accessed? Can meme theory help us to understand the process of how these beliefs, true and false, spread? Or are other theories needed to supplement this still-young field?

The theory of memes has gained much popularity as a catchall term for how ideas advance through our culture. As discussed in the literature review (App.1), it may take on slightly different iterations, such as Andrew Lynch's contagion metaphor or Malcolm Gladwell's Tipping Point, but the best definitions keep close to Richard Dawkins' original: "A unit of cultural transmission, or a unit of imitation" (192). It is this 'selfish' view analogous to Dawkins' gene theory that has been built on, in the hope that it will eventually develop into a legitimised social science.

Yet in spite of the work of many memeticists, the theory still seems to find greater acceptance in regards to the 'frivolous' fields of viral marketing and 'Internet memes', as opposed to as a serious social tool distinct from other more established ones. Writing in 1998 for the now-defunct online-based Journal of Memetics, Dr Paul Marsden addressed this issue in depth. He questions if the disciplines of social contagion and memetics are "two sides of the same social epidemiological coin" (7). Marsden adopts Dawkins' position of the memes'-eye view, changing the "What makes this person want to do x?" of social contagion into the "What is it about x that makes people want to do it?" of meme theory (5). This allows Marsden to take a structuralist position, seeing contagion as more of an evolutionary process than a handy metaphor (5). He concludes the theories are, in fact, one and the same and, further, that both could benefit from the others separate body of research (7).

In essence, meme theory is often disregarded when the paths of ideas are traced. In its stead are comparable approaches that allow for the examination of beliefs in society. For example, Philosopher Eric Hoffer's 1951 book The True Believer writes of social conditions as the prime factor in the escalation of mass movements. At a stretch, his chapter on "The Bored" could help to account for the proliferation of viral videos on the World Wide Web (50).

As evidenced by countless examples online and off, ideas need not be correct to spread. More important for their acceptance is that they have high "survival value", to use Dawkins' expression (193). An idea or meme with great psychological appeal for those who come in contact and are receptive to it would be deemed as having a high survival value. This is the "What is it about x..." idea of Marsden's mentioned previously. The evidence for or against an idea can become secondary to its attractiveness in these terms. This process can be amplified when participants have strong investment in the outcome, seemingly regardless of any evidence to the contrary. A browse through any one of the fifty-five archived discussions on Wikipedia's Evolution entry is testament to that (Wikipedia, Talk:Evolution/Archive 1).

The oft-derided Wikipedia.org is arguably now the default informational resource for Internet users. Despite the criticisms of validity or quality often leveled against it, at the very least, the knowledge on Wikipedia is built from a process of interaction in which people can take part. In other online avenues, this level of interaction is not possible. The Internet has allowed its users access to information at levels far greater than before its swift uptake in the mid-nineties. Inherent in this benefit are the risks of false information mingling with the truth. Most people would likely rate their chances of being able to tell fact from fiction when browsing the Web; it would be a rare person who would profess to being regularly misled. But the ability to mislead online cannot be dismissed as simply gullibility on the user's part. The professional and legislative principles that guide those who distribute news and knowledge in the real world are often absent online. A person's off-line expectations are therefore open to exploitation by online content generators who, for a variety of reasons, may produce misleading material.

Cass Sunstein's On Rumors highlights a further problem central to information or news gathering. He writes, "Most people are not able to know, on the basis of personal or direct knowledge, why an airplane crashed, or why a leader was assassinated, or why a terrorist attack succeeded" (16). This lack of knowledge can enable speculation to grow into elaborate conspiracy theories and on the Internet, this growth can proceed at an accelerated rate. For lay people who witnessed the many hours of footage from the World Trade Centre attacks of 2001, these two broad problems have resulted in a vast body of Internet-based information that revels in this incoherence. The documentary Loose Change is exemplary of the process; a professional-looking production published on the Web and based on the speculation of non-experts. Its main contention is that the attacks were the result of an inside job perpetuated by the American government. Even though the points on which the documentary is based have been proven false via rigorous research carried out by actual experts, for example Popular Mechanics' in depth coverage (Editors, Popular Mechanics.com), Loose Change continues to find an audience of believers, having undergone its fourth revision in 2009.

In earlier work Republic.com 2.0, Sunstein examined the insulative potential of the Internet. As opposed to real-world interactions, which may expose people to unsolicited views or ideas, the Internet allows individuals to seek only the information they want (48-49). The ultimate result of this 'Daily Me' only way of approaching content is that pre-existing beliefs are reinforced at the expense of any contrary to that view. Sunstein argues this provides a favourable environment for extremist groups to flourish (69). It is easy to see how forum-based websites dedicated to a particular cause on the hyper-text world of the Web would encourage members to stay and link to material that supported an insular view. Disingenuous white 'nationalist' website Stormfront.org actively ensures that any discourse on the site that may conflict is able to be avoided. The official guidelines for posting states: "If you're here to argue with us, confine your posts to the "Opposing Views" forum if you don't want them deleted." (Black, Stormfront.org). The content of the site may be determined by the moderators, but the motivation not to stray is wholly dependant on the user.

This seeking of conformation on the Internet is not limited to extremist organisations. Influential technology theorist David Weinberger argues that it may simply be a reflection of how most live their lives. Writing for Salon.com, Weinberger observes that people usually surround themselves with others and objects that conform to their general world view, from supporting a sports team to buying a book. (Weinberger, salon.com). To point out that these practices continue online is not, in itself, proof that Internet compels users to resist outside opinion. Weinberger suggests that if it does happen, this need not be inherently bad. Many conversations, or forums, can help to solidify action within a political group; "It binds supporters socially. It keeps their enthusiasm up. It lets them collectively work out interpretations and feelings within a group of people they trust precisely because of their shared agreement." (ibid). The design of many forums may help foster a reliance on circular knowledge that may or may not be based in fact, but it is irrational to assume that the majority of users never step outside of their informational 'bubble'.

An important force affecting an idea's uptake is the influence of the people active in its distribution. Malcolm Gladwell's "Salesmen" are the persuasive purveyors who are best at convincing others of a concept's merit (70). In Gladwell's analysis, he notes the subtlety at which this selling process takes place. It is not readily detectable at the assessable surface level, but rather relies on a series of almost-imperceptible trust-inducing gestures, in which natural Salesmen are highly proficient (79-88). Although Gladwell's analysis is about face-to-face contact, it serves to underline that when an idea is taking hold, influence often wins out over logic.   

This becomes especially problematic when people or companies with a pre-set agenda manage to rouse the masses for their own ends. The current American Tea Party movement was singled out as being a result of these motives by economist Paul Krugman in an op-ed piece in the New York Times. He labeled the movement "Astroturf", or a fake grass-roots campaign, which was started and still supported by right-wing organisation FreedomWorks. (Krugman, NYTimes.com). Whether the accusations about this particular movement are true or not, fake grassroots movements can have a powerful influence, convincing public and media alike of their validity. The official Tea Party website offers a large community of forums and content, (Main, teapartypatriots.org) with comprehensive links to real-world organisations across America (Links, teapartypatriots.org). An argument could be made that the source of the initial stimulus does not matter if it finds an audience. However, organisations that actively engage in providing self-serving information add a further hurdle to those seeking truth.

A popular form of ambiguous knowledge that has found a natural home on the Internet is the urban legend. They are frequently forwarded by users who may believe them to be true, but just as feasibly do not; their validity can be secondary to how compelling the story is. In a 2001 journal, co-author of Made to Stick Chip Heath applied a memetic analysis to urban legends.  Heath proposed that the spread of urban legends relies on emotional selection above any informational value (1029). Importantly, the emotion need not be negative, just provocative. He found that the forces for passing on an urban legend depended on a high 'survival value' in memetic terms, which fits his proposed "process of variation, selection, and retention" (ibid). He found that after this process had taken place, the resulting meme that was passed on by participants was the most provocative version of the urban legend (1039).

Heath mentions a myth-debunking website in which "[the] designers seem to take pleasure in cataloguing and debunking legends..." (1038). A check of the bibliography reveals this source to be snopes.com, a website established in 1995 that makes it simple to check a comprehensive amount of Internet-based and real-world urban myths (Mikkelson, snopes.com).

For years snopes.com has been the go-to resource for people (myself included) who like to authenticate or debunk the latest chain-email to enter their inbox. The point is, while some enjoy discovering that a piece of information is fake, many others prefer to take it at face value, and enjoy passing on a story that may interest another.

Conclusion

From these short examples, we can gather a rudimentary picture of how the Internet can influence belief. It shows that overall, it has allowed those who are willing and able easy access to a greater breadth of knowledge. Any technologically deterministic aspects of the Web seem to be secondary to the disposition of the user. The formats that have become prominent have, in over fifteen years of popular use, evolved to accommodate the needs of the user, more than the user has had to morph to the Web's structure. What it has allowed above all else is connection, to others and information. As mentioned, some parts of the Internet induce certain types of discourse or beliefs. However, the resources to check or refute are never usually far away. In discussing whether the Internet in general broadens or narrows viewpoints, David Weinberger asserts that "The Internet as a whole presents the broadest range of opinion, belief, feeling and creativity in the history of civilization." (Weinberger, salon.com). It comes down to the character of the user to explore the possibilities.

Bibliography

Black, Don. Guidelines For Posting. "Stormfront: Forums". http://www.stormfront.org/forum/f61/ (Accessed 24-05-210)

Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene: 30th anniversary ed., Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2009.

Gladwell, Malcolm. The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Boston: Little, Brown, 2000

Heath, Chip et al. Emotional Selection in Memes: The Case Of Urban Legends. "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology" 81, 2001.

Hoffer, Eric. The True Believer; Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements. New York: Harper and Row, 1951.

Krugman, Paul. Tea Parties Forever in "New York Times Online". http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/opinion/13krugman.html?_r=2 (Accessed 25-05-2010)

Marsden, Paul. Memetics and Social Contagion: Two Sides of the Same Coin? in "Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission". Volume 12 1998. http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/1998/vol2/marsden_p.html. (Accessed 24-05-210)

Mikkelson, David P., Snopes Homepage. "Snopes.com" http://www.snopes.com/. (Accessed 24-05-2010)

New Scientist. Age Of Denial. in "New Scientist Volume 206 No. 2760." Reed Business Information Ltd, Australia. 2010

Popular Mechanics Editors, Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report, "Popular Mechanics Online" http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/1227842 (Accessed 22-05-2010)

Sunstein, Cass R. On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2009

Sunstein, Cass R. Republic.Com 2.0. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007

Tea Party Patriots Main. http://teapartypatriots.ning.com/ (Accessed 25-05-2010)

Tea Party Patriots Links. http://www.teapartypatriots.org/Default.aspx (Accessed 25-05-2010)

Weinberger, David. Is there an echo in here? http://www.salon.com/technology/feature/2004/02/20/echo_chamber/ (accessed 25-05-2010)

Wikipedia. Talk:Evolution/Achive 1. in "Wikipedia.org" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Evolution/Archive_1 (Accessed 24-05-2010)