Experts interviewed by The New York Times are facing backlash for their suggestions on how President Joe Biden’s administration can combat misinformation.
The piece: In a feature published on Tuesday, Times’ technology columnist Kevin Roose outlined a variety of measures suggested by experts to combat the “hoaxes, lies, and collective delusions” that challenge Biden’s “new era of American unity.”
- The most controversial item on Roose’s list was an idea pushed by several of the authorities he interviewed: establishing a White House “reality czar,” who would coordinate the government’s response to misinformation and domestic extremism.
- “It sounds a little dystopian, I’ll grant,” Roose wrote. “But let’s hear them out.”
Who do the experts see as a threat? Renee DiResta, a researcher at Stanford University’s Internet Observatory, pointed to outlets that disseminate both election fraud and COVID-19 conspiracy theories.
- She suggested empowering a single agency to deal with both issues, rather than the Centers for Disease Control and Federal Election Commission tackling them separately,
- According to DiResta, “If each of them are doing it distinctly and independently, you run the risk of missing connections, both in terms of the content and in terms of the tactics that are used to execute on the campaigns.”
What else? Another measure involved “de-escalation ads,” which would involve shaping internet users’ experience of reality by “targeting high-risk potential violent extremists with empathetic messages about mental health and mindfulness.”
- Other recommendations included federally funded community development initiatives and the creation of a “truth commission” to address the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
- “We have to treat [combating disinformation and extremism] like we would any other social service,” said Christian Picciolini, head of the Free Radicals Project, an anti-extremism organization. “We have to destroy the institutional systemic racism that creates this environment. We have to provide jobs. We have to have access to mental health care and education.”
- At least one suggestion is likely to find bipartisan support: using regulatory power to investigate the workings of big tech companies’ content curation algorithms.
The reaction: Critics from across the political spectrum blasted the article on Twitter, calling its recommendations dangerous and comparing them to the “Ministry of Truth” in George Orwell’s “1984.”
- “‘[R]eality czar’ is a title brimming with dark and incredible energy,” tweeted columnist Matthew Walther.
- Israeli writer David Hazony, meanwhile, suggested the proposal is “illiberal.”
- “If you’re trying to fight paranoia, belief in conspiracy theories, and distrust of verifiable official sources, a presidentially appointed ‘Reality Czar’ leading a government-wide effort to stamp out perspectives and arguments that a federal panel has determined is not part of reality is like pouring gasoline on to a fire,” National Review’s Jim Geraghty wrote in an essay criticizing the news. .
Mainstream media: The article comes as corporate media outlets and journalists weigh the need to “deprogram” supporters of former President Donald Trump, stoking fears on the right about censorship.
- “That’s another vital principle of unity: We can all live here together in perfect harmony as long as one side stays perfectly quiet and obeys,” Fox News host Tucker Carlson said during a mid-January monologue on his top-rated show. “If they don’t, we’re going to have problems.”
