adding to this much later but while Yeah Sure there’s a time and a place for questions. There is nothing wrong with asking for a source when someone makes a claim. If someone says John Potato stole someone’s art and drew a bunch of triangles on it and then refuses to provide proof of said art. And then you go to John Potato’s page and there’s no triangled’ art. And the original person accusing John is suddenly refusing follow up questions..? Maybe you should question the legitimacy of the claims.
This is where cognitive bias comes in, and intentional or not, it is taken advantage of especially in internet drama. (I’ve linked the whole page for ease because so many of these fit this context. Recency, authority bias, etc)
People spreading misinformation- especially in the context of harassment or smear campaigns- rely on you to be shocked first. They claim heinous things (much worse than Triangle’d Art) in the hopes you won’t ask follow up questions.
Now you may be thinking, if someone’s provided proof (for example, screenshots and secondary cites) then isn’t it a surefire way to see that it’s real accusations?
Especially in ‘callout’ posts (which to restate, I already dislike) whether the information is legitimate or not, it often relies heavily on emotional or personal components to support it, especially triggering or shocking content that distracts you long enough to miss plot holes.
People want to believe there is a solid ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ in a situation and will fight against new information exclusively to hold up that idea- which is why this kind of misinformation is so hard to catch. Because if you slow down and ask for elaboration, or even poke holes, suddenly the emotional component comes into play.
…This is more of a dramatization, but it is an example of the sort of threat placed on asking questions.
And people (even if it isn’t the original person writing the ‘callout’) take advantage of this. If you speak up, they want to make you feel like you will be the problem. This is a tactic used horrifyingly often, ranging from online drama to even responses made to people protesting acts like KOSA and other ‘protect the children’ laws.
“That sounds scary! How am I supposed to find information if I don’t want to get involved?”
This is where it becomes dependent on the situation . Sometimes the healthiest thing you can do is avoid the entire thing and draw your own conclusions- however here’s my handy checklist I use for my own accounts, that you can use before getting involved in any way:
Read all sides first. If there’s only one, wait until there’s more before taking any action.
Be critical of the information given to you. Do not be swayed by emotional components and treat them as supplementary, opinionated accounts of the situation.
What does the original person stand to gain from speaking up about this? No, really. What is their motivation. Is it informing others about a threat? Is it clout? Are they getting someone back for something else?
Consider the source of the information they give you. If it’s public, is it linked? If it isn’t linked, despite being used as a talking point, why? Can you find it easily? Does the original match up?
If the information is private (eg; DMs, hearsay, [x] told me [y]) it cannot be treated as solid fact. It can be considered, but should not be a point upon which you make your final decision.
What aren’t you being told? Is it possible that without context, something is appearing worse than it is? If something is heavily cropped or isolated, what is the original person attempting to avoid showing?
And finally, how are both sides responding?
How do they answer questions? Do they answer questions that ask for elaboration or clarification? Are they mature answers?
Are they encouraging harassment or bullying? Are they trying to incite violence? (even digital violence, such as threats of mass account reports or doxxing)
What kind of language are they using? Look for passive aggression, manipulation, avoiding or guilt tripping a question, attempting to force a stance on someone via their inaction, etc.
Conversely, what are they not saying? Are they ignoring or obscuring something? Action is a thousand times more important than intent.
How do they react when someone disagrees with them?
This is in no way an exhaustive list! There are plenty of ways to dissect and explain any action, and ultimately it’s up to you what you do with what you find. However, whatever you choose, remember!
please do not ever participate in harmful things like doxxing, harrassing, threatening, or otherwise trying to hurt either side. It will always make things worse! You are hurting REAL PEOPLE behind the screen and you ARE NOT a moral warrior regardless of how right you think you are.
Trying to sort out the meanings behind accusations should never and never WILL mean you’re justified in causing them problems. It should only mean that you come away with a better understanding of the situation. Media literacy is a tool, not a weapon.
thank u for reading this far!! reblogs are greatly appreciated but are not mandatory, even just a heart is helpful! I love writing these and researching points.
citations and posts that influenced this one:
List of Cognitive Biases - Wikipedia
glitchedpuppet’s comic on polarized thinking (linked through my reblog because I can’t seem to link the base post?)
my previous comic ramble on media literacy (warning, this one lacks image ID. apologies)
Herd mentality - Wikipedia
please also do your own research this is what this post is about LOL
edit fixed half a paragraph being duplicated for some reason
