What If It’s Not True?

by | Dec 13, 2024

Do you know if it’s true?

Yesterday I saw a post from The Guardian stating that ‘the Majority of Brexit voters ‘would accept free movement’ to access a single market.’ Hallelujah, I thought as I considered its impact on people and businesses that I have witnessed nationwide.

Of course, someone replied with, ‘Where does this data come from? We have significant problems with immigration right now. Why would we be happy with floods of EU states people entering the country unchecked?‘ Floods. States. Unchecked. Sounds like a Farage supporter sprouting the Daily Mail and a quick investigation of his profile confirmed it.

Politics aside, what I always find the most disturbing is the lack of curiosity to know which is true.

What if it’s not true?

Why do people continue to believe people who consistently lie for their self-gain? Sadly, I don’t have an answer here. 🤷

However, The Guardian clearly stated and cited its true sources: ‘Perhaps the most striking finding was that 54% of Britons who voted leave, including 59% of voters in “red wall seats”, said in exchange for single market access they would now accept full free movement for EU and UK citizens to travel, live and work across borders. This could be because the surge in net migration to the UK after 2016 meant that Brexit was no longer seen by its supporters as the answer on immigration, the report suggested.

Hmm, so Brexit was not the answer to reducing “unchecked” “floods” of immigrants and that’s been true and evident for 8 years. 🤔

Before I move on to less inflammatory topics, the next post I read cited stats from the Bank of England and said, ‘‘We’re getting poorer’ says Nigel Farage in his Beth Rigby interview. I agree. The Brexit he championed is on course to cut UK trade by a staggering 15% – a huge reduction in the potential economic performance of the country at a time when every penny counts.

Which is true?

Do we trust fearless, independent journalism from a newspaper not owned by a billionaire or shareholders, or media outlets and politicians with a consistent history of lying for self-gain?

Maybe we trust neither.

Perhaps it’s time to engage our curiosity and critical thinking and look for facts because it’s already hard to spot the truth in the flood of mis- and disinformation!

 

What if this one isn’t true either

Most people using LinkedIn this week will have seen this PR disaster from YesMadam.

Is this true?

The posts about the email – on the left of the image above – felt like a witch hunt. Many assumed the email was genuine and angrily posted ‘How dare they!’ while I wondered why they weren’t engaging in any critical thinking.

My spindly senses tingled as I read it; I smelled a rat. Random thoughts included:

  • Why does it say external? It isn’t a forwarded email and it says it is to ‘current’ employees.

  • Why is the logo above her name? That’s odd. In fact, unusual to see a name at all on these kinds of posts.

  • Where is the source of this post? I did not see it from employees, current or former.

  • Though she does have a LinkedIn profile, hmm. 🧐

  • I could whip one of these up on Canva in about a minute.

  • Wow, her LinkedIn inbox must be exploding for all the wrong reasons.

So I went to YesMadam’s profile and saw the company’s response – the first page is on the right in the image above – and my suspicions were confirmed.

They state it was a publicity stunt. 🫠

Of course, other sources, including media sources, suggest it was a backpedal created by the uproar online. We may never know, but I do know people are unlikely to forget the company’s name and few will ever hear that it was a “stunt”.

Where’s the interest in the truth?

However, both examples and countless others I see, due to the staggering amount of AI-post-sameness and fakeness, make me despair at the loss of curiosity. Why don’t people seek the truth? Fact check. Doubt anything until proven true.

Maybe it’s because I am an author and I have to research and substantiate my words because they will be taken as fact. More likely it’s because, like 20% of the population, I am a highly sensitive person. (I talk about this in The Damage of Words)

Dr Elaine Aron has been researching HSP since 1991 and states, ‘It is innate. Biologists have found it in over 100 species (and probably there are many more) from fruit flies, birds, and fish to dogs, cats, horses, and primates. This trait reflects a certain type of survival strategy, being observant before acting.’ It makes sense; I took in all of the information I could find about both of these posts before responding. I observed before acting.

If you’ve ever been called too sensitive, too dramatic, too curious or too smart, check out these 12 signs you’re a highly sensitive person. Most of these resonate with me, especially the love of reading, researching, thinking and being curious. You can also take the HSP test here (it takes a minute) and do let me know if you are also the contradiction of being a high-sensation-seeking HSP like me!

P.S. If you have ever called someone too sensitive, too dramatic, too curious or too smart, check out the article! There is a reason this trait evolved. 🤔

Truth in an age of AI

To people who don’t engage in critical thinking and curiosity, it is time to start flexing those muscles. The amount of mis- and disinformation already in existence is staggering. Now with the ease with which people can use AI to generate BS and the lack of real consequence for doing so (even the risk of self-humiliation doesn’t seem to stop it), it is critical to seek the truth.

In the years ahead, using critical thinking and discernment will be essential, because it will be difficult to know what is true and what is not.

Trust your spindly senses.

Look at all sides.

Develop your intuition.

Be a truth seeker.

Because what if it’s not true and you believe it?

💛

Help spread the word: