timboucher

In my most recent post about the “state of conspiracy theory today”, both LVX23 and Professor Pan expressed their desire for the phrase “conspiracy theory” to just go away. LVX23 called it “a derogatory term that’s more often used to discredit researchers”, which Professor Pan echoed, and added in tin foil hat as another phase used to characterize ideas and researchers as “outlandish, absurd, and paranoid”. Professor Pan also rightly remarks that so much of the battle for public opinion these days is waged linguistically, and unless we can figure out a way to linguistically reframe the image of conspiracy theorists, we’re going to remain ghettoized as thinkers.

I tend to both agree and disagree with this. I definitely think the label of a conspiracy theorist is used intentionally to inflict damage on opponents by those who make public opinion. But there’s a part of me that thinks we can turn the meaning of it around by embracing it and warping it to a better image. To look at two other marginalized and oppressed subcultures as examples: check out what hip-hop did with the word “nigga” and what the gay community did with the word “queer”. Both of these words used to be used in very different connotations than they are now. For better or worse, the communities they were applied to took it and turned it around.

That said though, I think it’s probably a multi-pronged attack to change the image of conspiracy theory. What was that strategy Microsoft used to conquer the software world? I think it was called “Embrace & Extend.” That basically means they sucked the competitition inside of them, and then moved past it. So, what I suggested above might be part of the “embrace” manuever. But then we also need to extend conspiracy theory to be bigger than it is now. Professor Pan above derided the popular stereotype of conspiracy theorists as “outlandish, absurd, and paranoid”. But to be perfectly fucking honest, this is absolutely true in at least 75% or higher of conspiracy theorists. Again, I think these qualities should be embraced, but then extend beyond them.

So how do we do that? The best course that I can see is by hooking the conspiracy theory wagon onto the train of Media Literacy. In countries like Canada, as far as I know, a media literacy course is required for graduation from highschool. Not sure how long that’s been in effect, but for proof of it’s effectiveness, compare 5 minutes of Canadian network news coverage to five minutes in America. Or get into a discussion on world politics with Canadians in a bar, versus Americans in a bar. I’ve done it and I’ve seen the wild divergences. Not saying all Americans are this way, but the fact is there’s a very different value placed on this stuff in their culture.

So what’s media literacy all about? An easy place to start is the Center for Media Literacy. The CML has boiled down a nice set of 5 simple axioms to guide people in their quest to become literate in how the media operates.

1. All media messages are ‘constructed.’
2. Media messages are constructed using a creative language with its own rules.
3. Different people experience the same media message differently.
4. Media have embedded values and points of view.
5. Most media messages are constructed to gain profit and/or power.

Each of these principles has a corresponding simple question the media student (ie, budding conspiracy theorist in disguise) can ask:

1. Who created this message?
2. What creative techniques are used to attract my attention?
3. How might different people understand this message differently from me?
4. What lifestyles, values and points of view are represented in, or omitted from, this message?
5. Why is this message being sent?

We can get more complex than that, but I think these are excellent jumping off points. Why are they so good? First of all, they are all basically non-judgemental. A few of the basic principles might be tweaked or need an explanation for some people to really grasp, but they are pretty hard to argue against. And from there, we have a series of open-ended questions. This is always going to be more powerful than a statement of fact in opening somebody’s mind for the first time. If you simple say, “Look, it’s all a conspiracy and here’s how the conspiracy works”, then they have every right to write off what you’re saying, because it doesn’t jive with what they know. If you ask them pointed questions though, they serve as a bridge between their existing knowledge, and knowledge that might be gained down the road. If you do it in the right way, you’re also inspiring them to think and research on their own, rather than training them to use you or somebody else as an authority.

The potential flaw I see in this approach is that it’s more than possible for somebody to ask and fully answer the above questions in a satisfactory way, and still not see a far-ranging conspiracy. This is liable to upset really hardcore conspiracy theorists who are trying to jump on the media literacy bandwagon. But these things have to be taken in stages, and to me this makes a lot of sense as a good firm stage one. Maybe we need to come up with a whole different set of questions which people can critically apply once they’ve really got a handle on the basics of this stuff. If anybody’s interested, let’s work on this, cause I think it’s a great idea.

Another prong in our multi-pronged attack could be also to show how official explanations are often no better than conspiracy theories. This article is a great analysis of the official government explanation of Sept. 11, showing how ludicrous and impossible it really sounds. This article might be a great place to derive another set of principles that media literacy students can use to poke holes in stories and spot inconsistencies. Maybe this could be connected to the “Stage Two” I described above. One more thing I think it would be important to take into account. Most of us were not effectively trained to be self-directed learners in school. Instead we relied on state-sponsored and teacher-delivered curricula. Conspiracy theory/media literacy tends to be the kind of study that requires a great deal of discipline and intelligence to navigate. We need to figure out ways to articulate and get people up to speed quickly on better self-directed learning strategies. Anyway, just something to get the ball rolling. Let me know your thoughts, as always.

• The Value of Alternative Media, Gossip & Conspiracies
• Media Literacy Questions
• Media Literacy & Gnosticism
• Media literacy quote
• Historical ad databases