Lee McIntyre — Post-Truth

Yield

183 of 481 paragraphs kept (38.0%). Target for nonfiction_default: 35%–50% — on target.

Pre-Assessment

I don’t have enough specific information to assess this precisely. “Post-Truth” is a title used by several authors (most notably Lee McIntyre’s 2018 MIT Press book Post-Truth and Evan Davis’s earlier Post-Truth), and since the author is listed as “unknown,” I can’t verify who wrote this copy or their credentials or currency. The subject matter — post-truth politics, media manipulation, and epistemic crisis — typically yields a blend of concepts and frameworks (e.g., the erosion of shared factual standards, the role of social media algorithms) with supporting contemporary examples, closer to analysis than pure fact or pure inspiration. But which strand dominates depends heavily on which author and edition you have; I’d want to confirm authorship before trusting any claims it makes. Also note the topic is fast-moving, so publication date matters a lot for how current the material can be. The unspecified purpose and default nonfiction stance give me little signal on what you’re hoping to extract.

Thesis

Post-truth spans a spectrum from bullshit and spin to self-deception and delusion · ch. 6

Argument

Annotation Roundup

Question

Observers fear current politics is re-enacting 1984’s truth-as-casualty dynamics — Worth pursuing: is the 1984 analogy actually apt, or does it obscure the more mundane market/affect-driven mechanisms the book will unpack?
Intent to deceive can be inferred from persistence despite the falsity being revealed — Whether inference-of-intent from persistence is the key move that distinguishes lying from mere post-truth indifference seems central to the book’s taxonomy—worth chasing how McIntyre resolves it.
Anti-government ideology independently motivated climate-change denial beyond industry funding — Falsely flagging suspicion as fact-checkable question: how cleanly can ideology versus funding be separated when the same actors had both?
Cognitive bias plus curated information feeds industrial post-truth vulnerability — The mechanism connecting cognitive bias to news silos to manipulation is the chapter’s thesis and worth a fuller model.
Cognitive biases are an inherited feature of all human brains, not curable — McIntyre raises whether truth is adaptive without resolving it — worth chasing the evolutionary puzzle of why false belief persists.
Presenting disconfirming evidence to partisans strengthens rather than weakens their views — Nyhan and Reifler’s original findings on the backfire effect were later called into question by replication failures — worth chasing whether the effect survives scrutiny or was overstated.
Liberals resisted corrections but showed no backfire effect, unlike conservatives — If the backfire effect turned out asymmetrical between partisan groups, is that a real cognitive asymmetry or an artifact of which false beliefs were tested? Later replications would probe exactly this.
Even the most partisan reasoners eventually change beliefs under repeated corrective evidence — Worth chasing: what distinguished the repeated exposers who tipped from those who never did in Redlawsk’s study?
Cognitive biases are hardwired parts of human brains rather than avoidable mistakes. — The author flags why biases exist at all as an open puzzle—worth chasing the evolutionary/adaptive explanations literature later.
Fox viewers were measurably less well informed than people watching no news. — Worth chasing the actual 2011 study citation (likely a measure of general knowledge vs. Fox exposure) for a fact-check essay.
The 1979 Iran hostage crisis created the demand that birthed a new news format — The chapter cuts off mid-sentence at ‘Then someone had an idea:’ — worth noting this is clearly leading to Nightline. The excerpt itself is only fragmentary since the payoff sentence is in the next section, so this may be worth revisiting once the full scene is in view.
Fox viewers were measurably less well informed than people watching no news. — Worth chasing: what is the exact 2011 study showing Fox viewers were less informed than non-viewers, and how is ‘informed’ measured?
Partisans trust news sources sorted by ideology, with liberals trusting even comedy outlets — Worth chasing: that conservatives name Fox 44% but liberals trust comedy (Daily Show) near-par with CNN suggests asymmetric polarization in how the two camps define ‘news.’
Fear of Fox comparison pushed mainstream media toward false balance — Is the both-sides move really a product of Fox’s 1996 challenge, or does false equivalence have deeper, older roots in professional objectivity norms? Worth chasing the history.
The concept of news itself was invented in the 1830s Jacksonian era — What exactly changed in the 1830s to make ‘news’ a concept? Penny press, literacy, advertising models?
Fake news transitions from a profit motive to political weaponization — Incentive structure worth chasing: under what conditions does clickbait tip into propaganda? Could model this like the Milgrom reputation dynamics.
Erosion of truth-telling is a warning sign preceding authoritarian politics — Snyder’s claim “post-truth is pre-fascism” raises the question of timescale and mechanism — worth chasing the full argument in On Tyranny.
Filtering fake news invites charges of censorship bias. — Worth chasing: does this ‘bias in judging bias’ dynamic explain why platforms prefer opaque algorithms to transparent editors?
Pro-Trump fake news earned vastly more ad revenue than pro-Clinton content — The profit asymmetry — pro-Trump fabricated content massively out-earning pro-Clinton — is itself a striking empirical fact worth chasing for audience-psychology or algorithmic explanation.
One small Macedonian town hosted over a hundred pro-Trump fake news websites — The Macedonia claim — over a hundred pro-Trump sites from one town — is a striking concentration worth chasing for verification and explanation.
Fake news has nearly triggered inter-state nuclear conflict — Worth verifying the full account of the Pakistani defense minister’s December 2016 threat and its diplomatic aftermath.
The post-truth problem’s roots trace directly to academic postmodernism — Worth chasing: which specific academic doctrines and lineages does McIntyre credit with seeding post-truth, and is the causal claim defensible or rhetorical?
Science studies arguments were co-opted by science deniers — Latour’s legacy question about whether sociologists of science bear responsibility for today’s epistemically weaponized skepticism is worth chasing further.
Self-affirmation weakly aids acceptance of corrective facts, but graphics outperform narratives — What exactly counts as ‘graphical form’ here, and does the effect replicate? Worth chasing the original Nyhan-Reifler study. Xref
Ideologues pair extreme doubt toward disfavored facts with total credulity toward favored ones — The asymmetric-doubt-plus-credulity mechanism anticipates Kahneman-style confirmation bias and resonates with vaccine/climate denial literature.
Post-truth spans a spectrum from bullshit and spin to self-deception and delusion — Connects to Frankfurt’s On Bullshit concept and to the Orwell 1984 allusions elsewhere in this chapter.
Post-truth tactics first matured in right-wing science denial campaigns — Parallels the ‘manufacturing doubt’ playbook literature and the encroachment of denial tactics beyond science into general politics.
Post-truth predates 2016 with roots in cognitive bias, philosophy, and media change — Connects to the growing literature on science denial and manufactured doubt (Oreskes, Proctor), and to the moral-panic/hype-cycle critiques of post-truth as a term.
Brexit and Trump’s election resulted from rather than caused post-truth — The ‘symptoms not cause’ framing parallels the earlier Milgrom note that institutions emerge to solve prior information problems rather than causing them.
Falsifiable claims coexisted with advisers rejecting evidential standards outright — The juxtaposition of Trump’s specific false claims (murder rate, crowd size) with Gingrich’s epistemic dismissal of ‘liberal statistics’ prefigures the chapter’s core thesis that post-truth is about feelings overriding facts.
Observers fear current politics is re-enacting 1984’s truth-as-casualty dynamics — Orwell’s 1984 (which is in my library as 2001 by Clarke, but also evokes the dystopian lineage) — themes of falsified facts as authoritarian tools.
Trump symptomizes rather than causes post-truth — Resonates with analyses distinguishing a culture of lying from any single demagogue, and with the populist-epistemics literature.
Seeding doubt about settled science effectively confuses the public — This is the exact Merchants of Doubt ‘manufacturing uncertainty’ theme, now applied as groundwork for the book’s later post-truth argument.
Accusing science of bias is a stepping-stone to admitting ideologically tainted alternatives — Echoes the “both sides” / false-balance journalism critique and manufactured-doubt tactics from Merchants of Doubt.
Manufactured scientific doubt was the proving ground for today’s wholesale rejection of truth. — Connects to the broader theme running through Horkheimer/Adorno on the culture industry and manufactured consent, and to literature on strategic ignorance and doubt-as-product.
Climate-change denial organizations were directly funded by tobacco and fossil-fuel interests — Connects directly to Oreskes & Conway’s Merchants of Doubt, cited as the source authority.
Even fully exposed disinformation strategies succeed because facts cannot override trained media habits — Connects to the ‘both sides’ journalism critique (false balance) and to the earlier fire-and-hide tobacco chapter of this same book.
Manufactured doubt, not genuine debate, explains public confusion over climate science consensus — Direct echo of the ‘Doubt is their product’ industry strategy documented in Merchants of Doubt regarding tobacco and acid rain.
Politicians can disregard evidence openly when partisanship outweighs facts for their voters. — Extends the science-denial mechanisms from earlier in this chapter — tobacco, climate change, vaccine denial — to the general post-truth strategy.
Science denial trained today’s politicians to deny any inconvenient facts. — Caps the chapter’s central argument that the post-truth playbook originates in organized science denial campaigns like tobacco and climate change.
People paid less to lie rationalize the lie as genuine belief — Classic insufficient-justification result, later carried into Aronson and Bem’s self-perception theory; connects to general literature on why small incentives breed deeper commitment than large ones.
Disconfirmed prophecies get reinterpreted rather than abandoned when believers are invested — Connects to cognitive dissonance literature and to cult-defection psychology; plausible link to writing about how belief systems resist falsification.
Shared social reinforcement amplifies irrational rationalization of mistaken beliefs — Directly relevant to the reader’s interest in Islamophobia and The New Crusades — social confirmation of collectively held false beliefs undergirds group-based prejudice.
People discount their own sense evidence to conform to group consensus — Asch conformity connects to reader’s work on Islamophobia as socially manufactured collective belief.
News silos cannot protect audiences from post-truth because both exploit the same biases — Directly echoes the ‘gated communities’/echo chamber literature and connects to my Islamophobia and the Novel notes on self-selecting readers.
Cognitive biases toward group acceptance are the precursor for post-truth — Pairs with my existing notes on moral panics and ideology-critique (Hall, Adorno) where group conformity underwrites belief formation.
People preferentially seek confirming evidence and avoid testing their own hypotheses. — The 2-4-6 task parallels later work on hypothesis testing and falsification like Klayman and Ha.
Over a third of people deny clear sensory evidence to conform with a group. — Connects to the Asch conformity experiments and broader literatures on social pressure overriding perception.
Presenting disconfirming evidence to partisans strengthens rather than weakens their views — Connects to motivated reasoning literature and the broader arc of this book toward how post-truth weaponizes cognitive bias.
Even the most partisan reasoners eventually change beliefs under repeated corrective evidence — Connects to the reader’s broader interest in stubborn political belief — the backfire effect literature and the ‘grease fire’ metaphor for fact-checking.
The least skilled performers show the largest overestimation of their own ability. — Connects to the reader’s broader interest in how competence and self-assessment distort judgment, and specifically the central mechanics of denial/deception that runs through the whole post-truth thread.
Self-deception about our own limits, not deliberate lying, drives overconfidence. — The monetary-incentive null result is a powerful experimental finding connecting emotional attachment and identity to reasoning failure across the bias literature.
Conservatives believe threatening falsehoods more readily than liberals do — Connects to the broader backfire-effect discussion in the prior chapter and to the 2016 fake-news targeting literature.
Face-to-face interaction historically countered cognitive bias by forcing diverse viewpoints — Echoes the filter-bubble and echo-chamber thesis familiar from Sunstein and Pariser, and the tradeoff between online curation and pre-modern enforced contact.
Talk radio monetized confirmation bias by giving audiences a voice in echo chambers. — Builds directly on ch8 insights in book’s later chapters about confirmation bias being an inherited feature of human brains, and on idea that digital media isolate people from contrary opinion.
Limbaugh’s call screening aimed at community feeling, not debate. — Connects to the mechanics of echo chambers and confirmation-bias community-building discussed in trust/reputation literature on group solidarity.
Talk radio succeeded by giving alienated audiences a voice, not by informing them — Connects to the chapter’s broader theme of post-truth and confirmation bias; echoes McLuhan-style claims about audience participation in media.
Partisan cable news abandoned objectivity to confirm viewer biases at the public’s expense — Connects to deliberation-mass polarization claims in Annihilation of Caste and to the complacency/mainstreaming arguments from the New Crusades works on Islamophobic media.
Fear of Fox comparison pushed mainstream media toward false balance — This is the standard ‘bothsidesism’ accusation later made against prestige media — connects to critiques of false equivalence in journalism and to how the objectivity norm itself enabled misinformation.
Equal-time objectivity norms create false equivalence on settled factual issues — Connects to the reader’s interest in manufactured doubt and how institutional norms create epistemic harm — parallels the planted-facts essays on disinformation as a weapon.
Fossil fuel funding manufactured doubt that made climate change a partisan media issue — The coined term ‘manufactured doubt’ connects to work on mercenary doubt and how funding manufactured skepticism tracks to the reader’s weapons-of-ignorance material.
Manufactured ‘both sides’ coverage made the public believe science was genuinely divided — Echoes the Milgrom law-merchant material: institutions/trust — here the media’s objectivity norm getting weaponized.
Balanced-reporting norms let fringe deniers distort coverage of settled science — Echoes the ‘information bias’ concept and mirrors Milgrom’s finding that institutional norms can fail by serving formally neutral goals badly — connects to the law-merchant articles on how formal structures change incentive outcomes.
Believing all media are biased pushes partisans toward their own echo chambers. — Generalizes to the ‘motivated reasoning’ and ‘confirmation bias’ mechanisms that ground this book’s whole post-truth thesis.
The concept of news itself was invented in the 1830s Jacksonian era — Connects to my interest in how modern categories (like ‘news,’ ‘privacy,’ even time zones) are recent inventions.
The Associated Press’s shared-client model invented journalistic objectivity — Parallel to Milgrom’s finding that third-party adjudication systems arise to solve information problems among traders with divergent allegiances.
Newspaper circulation, revenue, and staff collapsed sharply since 2014 — Empirical grounding for the earlier ch9 claim that reporting routines and profitability pressures degraded fact-based journalism; these are the numbers behind ‘60 Minutes proved news could profit’.
Fake news softens trust in sources before status-based propaganda replaces persuasion — Pairs with the general literature on epistemic mistrust and propaganda (Stanley’s How Propaganda Works), plus the reader’s prior material on how disinformation erodes trust infrastructure.
Flooding discourse with dishonesty can displace censorship as a control tool — Echoes Harry Frankfurt’s On Bullshit and the general bullshit-as-control-of-information theme; also pairs with the Alfred Döblin observation about bullshit piling up out of powerlessness.
Authoritarian propaganda exploits cognitive biases while hiding the manipulation itself — Connects to the reader’s knowledge of Nazi propaganda techniques and cognitive bias literature (source amnesia, repetition effect) from memory books
Fake news technology is a neutral tool whose harm depends on human response. — Echoes the phone-era anxiety of Innis-era communication theory and McLuhan-adjacent debates about medium over message that recur across this library’s media books.
Algorithmic feeds convert the open Internet into personalized echo chambers — Relates to the reader’s earlier chapter contrast between self-imposed silos and state-driven propaganda; the source of vetting shifts from editors to friends plus algorithm.
Social media let confirmation bias drive news consumption, undercutting paid mainstream outlets — Connects to the reader’s ongoing work on motivated reasoning and echo chambers as distinct from deliberate disinformation campaigns.
News aggregators strip away the visual and contextual cues that once signaled reliability — Connects to Lofland’s point that appearance and other surface cues once stabilized urban judgment of strangers — aggregators remove exactly those categorical cues.
Audience laziness and entitlement, not just technology, enable modern fake news — Echoes the premise behind Zamyatin’s ‘We’ and other laments that cheap convenience erodes vigilance; also aligns with McLuhan-era claims that media shape audiences as much as content.
Fake news is deliberately false and evolved from clickbait to political manipulation — Connects to the reader’s broader interest in disinformation mechanics and how market incentives precede political instrumentalization, paralleling the Milgrom law-merchant material on incentive structures driving behavior.
A single fabricated news story fabricated at a kitchen table reached six million readers — Connects to viral falsity research (Vosoughi et al.) showing falsehood spreads faster than truth on social platforms.
Political impact of fake news is independent of its creators’ actual motives — Connects to the German hacker case from earlier chapters and to the broader fake-news chapters of this book on motive versus effect.
Deliberate misinformation weaponized for profit or power can outcompete true news — Connects to the reader’s work on ritual sacrifice and moral panic themes where fabricated or amplified beliefs drive real-world action.
A founder of social constructivism publicly regretted that his ideas aided right-wing climate denial — Pairs with chapters 6-7 on manufactured doubt and the industrial production of uncertainty.
Science deniers do not reject science itself, only its inconvenient conclusions — Connects to ch6-7 earlier material distinguishing deep epistemic doubt from motivated selective doubt; also echoes contrarian claims about ideologues’ asymmetric credulity/skepticism.
The political right moved from attacking postmodernism to weaponizing it — Echoes the pattern in The Frankfurt School history where a theory’s political deployment outruns its authors’ intent.
Postmodernism holds that truth claims are really bids for political power — Connects to Foucauldian power/knowledge claims encountered in earlier chapters of Along the Archival Grain and Communication as Culture.
Postmodernists enabled misuse of their ideas by retreating into subtlety — The ‘boning knife as a hammer’ and intellectual-responsibility theme recurs in how Amis and others weaponize academic framings, seen in Islamophobia and the Novel.
Postmodernism overreached when it turned from literary texts to natural science — The boundary move described here mirrors the Science Wars and connects to the author’s broader post-truth argument elsewhere in the book.
The 1996 Sokal hoax succeeded because Social Text lacked peer review — Connects to the reader’s broader interest in epistemic mechanisms of intellectual gatekeeping and how institutions validate truth claims.
Intelligent Design’s godfather openly declared himself a postmodernist deconstructionist — Contradicts the common assumption that science-denialists are unsophisticated; shows deliberate weaponization of an academic critique of objectivity.
Intelligent Design’s founder reframed the evolution fight to avoid a science-versus-Bible framing — Connects to the tobacco-strategy doubt-manufacturing described in chapter 2 and Oreskes/Conway’s Merchants of Doubt.
Right-wing denialists weaponized academic leftist skepticism of experts — This parallels the recurring finding (Frankfurt School, Postman) that cultural critique can be weaponized by the forces it critiques.
Anti-factual tactics normatively rebound hardest onto the vulnerable they were meant to protect — Moral-cost argument mirrors the claim that ideals detached from effects can devastate those they aim to help.
Postmodern interpretive relativism, once applied to politics, licenses alternative facts — Direct echo of the Sokal hoax and Conway’s ‘alternative facts’ framing that threads through the whole book.
Conspiracy bloggers explicitly cite postmodern relativism to justify distrusting mainstream news. — Direct empirical instance supporting the book’s core thesis that postmodernism seeded post-truth — the Cernovich quote is the chapter’s pivotal evidence.
Serial falsehood complicates the lie-truth distinction when speakers believe their claims — Distinguishing belief-laden falsehood from deliberate lie echoes the broader post-truth framework of the book and Arendt’s analysis of the liar who believes his own fictions; connects to discussions of ‘alternative facts’ elsewhere in the ethics-of-communication literature.
Refuting a lie aims at its audience, not the liar — Connects to the epistemic-bubbles debate about whether debunking persuades believers; this argues counterfactual-convincing only works on the not-yet-committed.
Ignoring a false attack let it define the message — Recalls the norm that false claims deserve no dignity — a pre-post-truth etiquette whose failure helped launch an era.
Self-affirmation weakly aids acceptance of corrective facts, but graphics outperform narratives — Connects to motivated reasoning and confirmation-bias research on why threatening facts get rejected.
Emotional reactions signal confirmation bias, not evidence against a story. — Connects to the confirmation-bias experiments (2,4,6 Wason task) and the fifth-grade rubric work referenced earlier in the chapter and book.
Trump treats truth as socially confirmed approximation rather than correspondence to fact — Echoes the self-sealing epistemology described elsewhere where neither confirmation nor disconfirmation can register against the speaker’s framing; resonates with ‘authoritarian’ communications scholarship. Seed
Post-truth tactics first matured in right-wing science denial campaigns — Angle: tracing the migration of denialist tactics from tobacco/climate to general political fact — a genealogy piece.
ExxonMobil planned Arctic drilling to exploit the very melting its funded skeptics denied — The internal contradiction — paying to deny a forecast while betting a business strategy on that same forecast coming true — is a vivid essay hook about motivated reasoning at corporate scale.
Manufactured doubt, not genuine debate, explains public confusion over climate science consensus — Angle: the 97% vs 27% gap as the cleanest quantifiable measure of manufactured ignorance — how consensus-vs-perception gaps track deliberate disinformation spending.
People excuse immorality from in-group members arbitrarily defined — The wristband experiment is a crisp lever for prose about tribalism and could anchor an essay on how identity trumps ethics.
Digital media isolate people from contrary opinion which face-to-face life once forced — The paradox that digital tribes are more insulated than physical ones could anchor a piece on echo chambers.
Disconfirmed prophecies get reinterpreted rather than abandoned when believers are invested — Angle: how high-stakes public commitment to a belief pre-commits people to rationalizing rather than revising — useful for writing on post-truth and on why disconfirmation backfires.
Echo chambers convert the social-corrective group effect into conformity pressure — Article angle on the asymmetry: the same group dynamics that correct error when exposure is random flip into conformity enforcement when we curate our own interlocutors.
People preferentially seek confirming evidence and avoid testing their own hypotheses. — The 2-4-6 task is a vivid pedagogical demonstration of why disconfirmation is hard — usable in any essay on how to test beliefs.
Group affiliation alone can override moral condemnation of cheating. — Could anchor an essay on how trivial markers of in-group membership license moral flexibility.
Fox News succeeded because market demand for partisan news already existed — The Kruthammer quip that Ailes ‘discovered a niche audience: half the American people’ is an essay-ready line about how partisanship sells.
News outlets demanded false balance on climate because backers and advertisers bought it — Angles for an essay on how ‘balance’ as a commercial product, not a norm, manufactures public confusion — the price of neutrality is paid by readers in epistemic damage.
Balanced-reporting norms let fringe deniers distort coverage of settled science — Angle: ‘balanced reporting’ as an institutional failure mode, contrasted with how science adjudicates consensus — essay on when neutrality itself becomes bias.
Erosion of truth-telling is a warning sign preceding authoritarian politics — A short art-essay angle: examining the historical sequence Snyder claims between misinformation-normalization and tyranny.
Fake news is better countered by flooding with real news than censorship. — Angle: the symmetric structure of ‘flooding’ — the same distribution mechanism that spreads falsehood could, if funded and supported, spread verified journalism.
Fifth-graders can learn to detect fake news through practice games. — Angle: media-literacy education as inoculation against post-truth, using a rubric-plus-game model tested with kids.
Partisan misinformation flourished during both the French and American revolutions — Could support an essay on the historical depth of information warfare before its tech-enabled phase — propaganda as a founding condition of modern politics.
A newspaper circulation war helped spark the Spanish-American War — Angle for piece on incentives driving misinformation long before the internet — the economics of outrage is not new.
Hearst fabricated visual atrocity propaganda to provoke a war — Strong example that fabricated images and deliberate disinformation predate social media by over a century — useful correction to fake-news novelty narrative.
Audience laziness and entitlement, not just technology, enable modern fake news — Fertile essay angle: reframe fake news not as a technology problem but as an attention-and-effort contract the public stopped honoring — historicizing free press as recent, partisan norm as ancient.
A single fabricated news story fabricated at a kitchen table reached six million readers — An essay angle: the kitchen-table fake-news economy — how lone amateurs outcompeted professional journalism for reach with near-zero production cost.
Political impact of fake news is independent of its creators’ actual motives — An essay angle: the irrelevance of motive — why the money-versus-ideology debate misses that both produce the same epistemic poisoning.
Weaponizing the term fake news lets leaders dismiss verified reporting — Could support an essay on how the vocabulary of epistemic crisis gets captured by those it was coined against.
The Sokal hoax backfired by publicizing postmodernist ideas to right-wing readers — The counterintuitive ‘publicity backfires’ dynamic — an attempt to discredit an idea spreads it and hands it to opportune adopters — could anchor an essay about epistemic contamination.
Intelligent Design theory deliberately borrowed postmodernist tactics from evolution’s opponents — The ‘teach the controversy’ playbook and its postmodern disguise could anchor an essay on how doubt-manufacturing tactics migrate across science-denial battles.
Anti-factual tactics normatively rebound hardest onto the vulnerable they were meant to protect — Essay angle: intellectual history of how emancipatory epistemologies turn self-destructive when their tools leak into power’s hands.
Public climate inaction takes four distinct psychological evasion forms — A typology of climate-evasion arguments and their rebuttals could structure an essay or talk. Define
Openly subordinating facts to feelings is a new strategy for political dominance — Distinguishes post-truth from mere propaganda or falsehood by its open embrace as a mechanism of political dominance.
False equivalence between sides is itself a hallmark of post-truth — Identifies denial that a problem exists as post-truth’s defining counterpart, and false balance as complicity.
Post-truth spans a spectrum from bullshit and spin to self-deception and delusion — McIntyre maps Frankfurt’s bullshit onto political truth-relations and reserves post-truth in purest form for believing the crowd’s reaction changes the facts.
Fact-challenging arises from motive to protect beliefs and enables political domination — Defines post-truth as ideological supremacy aimed at compelling belief regardless of evidence.
The term post-truth entered public discourse through 2016’s Brexit and US election — Establishes the defining moment when ‘post-truth’ entered the lexicon as a named phenomenon.
The prefix ‘post’ in post-truth means truth is eclipsed, not past — Defines ‘post-truth’ via the Oxford dictionaries’ parsing of the prefix.
The correspondence view of truth dates to Aristotle but remains contested among philosophers — Establishes the baseline definition of truth the book will contrast post-truth against.
Post-truth’s novelty is denying reality’s existence, not lying or spin. — Defines what is genuinely new about post-truth versus the ancient vices of lying and spin: an attack on reality itself.
Post-truth spans distinct attitudes from bullshitting to delusive self-deception. — Distinguishes bullshitting (indifference), spin (intent to deceive), cynicism, and delusion as the spectrum under the post-truth umbrella.
Science deniers exploit science’s unfalsifiability-of-proof to demand equal standing for pseudoscience. — Clarifies the fact that scientific theories can never be proven true, only strongly warranted by evidence — and why that is not a weakness.
Motivated reasoning is the motive while confirmation bias is the mechanism — Precisely delineates motivated reasoning (the state of mind) from confirmation bias (the mechanism) — a useful distinction worth keeping straight.
People preferentially seek confirming evidence and avoid testing their own hypotheses. — Concrete experimental demonstration of confirmation bias, showing the mechanism rather than just the concept.
Desires and emotional comfort shape what people believe is true — Clear one-line definition of motivated reasoning plus its mechanism, anchored by the Upton Sinclair quote.
Reporting routines themselves, not political views, produced pro-climate-denial coverage. — Introduces ‘information bias’ as distinct from political bias, a useful analytic term.
The goal of objectivity is to facilitate truth, not equal time. — A clean redefinition of journalistic objectivity that reframes the whole chapter’s argument.
Limbaugh pioneered positioning himself as truth against mainstream media. — Distinguishes Limbaugh’s innovation: claiming exclusive truth against all other media, versus merely offering partisan commentary.
Satire aims to ridicule absurdity rather than to deceive viewers — Draws the working distinction between satire and fake news — satirists expose journalism’s pretenses while fake news exploits them.
Journalistic objectivity means facilitating truth, not equal time to falsehood — Redefines what ‘objectivity’ properly demands of journalism in a post-truth era.
The Associated Press’s shared-client model invented journalistic objectivity — Explains the market-infrastructure origin of the objectivity norm.
Fake news transitions from a profit motive to political weaponization — Core working definition distinguishing deliberately-false fake news from mere falsehood, with an evolutionary arc.
Flooding discourse with dishonesty can displace censorship as a control tool — Bulls-in-a-china-shop phrasing that defines the post-truth condition as truth being buried rather than directly suppressed.
Some fake news outlets deliberately mimic legitimate news brands to exploit trust — ABCNews.com.co exemplifies the ‘lookalike domain’ tactic central to fake news operations.
Fake news is deliberately false and evolved from clickbait to political manipulation — Gives a crisp working definition distinguishing fake news (deliberately false) from mere falsehood, and traces its 2016 shift from profit to politics.
Postmodernism holds that truth claims are really bids for political power — A compact statement of what the author presents as the second thesis of postmodernism (truth claims as power assertions).
Social constructivists aimed to undermine science’s single privileged perspective. — Distinguishes the strong programme’s stance from the weak hypothesis.
Correcting false beliefs can strengthen them rather than reduce them — Concise definition of backfire effect, the counterintuitive finding that corrections can reinforce error.
False equivalence can disguise bias under a show of balance — Defines false equivalence as treating unequal views as equal to evade accusations of partisanship.

Digital Mind 🧠

Browse

Lee McIntyre — Post-Truth

Lee McIntyre — Post-Truth

Yield

Pre-Assessment

Thesis

Argument

Annotation Roundup

Table of Contents