In the dramatic days of Russian madness in Ukraine le parallel armies, those of information and counter-information, fight on two fronts: that of telematic intrusions, to undermine the very mechanisms of modern living, and that of the narratives of what one wants to represent. The false, the true, the manipulated, the deception. Does our ingrained habit of the big network defend us or protect us? There are disturbing signs. Bad countermeasures, fortunately, there are. Is it worthwhile, right now, to analyze some crucial points of the delicate phenomenon of fake news? How to handle it correctly? Yes of course. Here then is a small but useful breviary staged with a consulting luminary: Andrea Aparo von Flue. Starting from a few examples, only apparently "light", of the many deceptions that can creep around us.
Fake news, the latest representations
Yet they believe it. Here are the microscopic graphene devices injected together with the anti-Covid vaccine, to be activated with the waves of 5G mobile phones to manipulate bodies and minds to make us servants of someone. Here is the deception of the round earth which is instead flat, therefore you have to be careful when going for walks in the countryside because you risk falling when the first hill appears. And so on.
A quaint gullible club? The phenomenon is more worrying. It is estimated that a not contemptible 5% of the population Italian (one citizen out of 20!) is part of the army of those who are not willing to heed common sense. Multifaceted and colorful army. Ready to insinuate himself among the fearful of the vaccine, perhaps to fully enlist them not only in the no vax community but even among the supporters of the Holy Alliance on telematic Covid between BigPharma and telecommunications, in the name of who knows what great maneuverers of the new world order.
Creepy or rather understandable drifts? Spontaneous or maybe manipulated for who knows what interest? So why not ask yourself what is decidedly false or perhaps remotely probable? In short: is it a handful (not so small) of fools or something more disturbing? Maybe someone will make money? And how to unmask the game, an integral part of the increasingly robust phenomenon of fake news?
Fake news, how to unmask them
We talk about it with a man who boasts a good angle of view. Andrea Aparo von Flüe is not only a well-regarded physicist in half the world who devotes a good chunk of his time to university teaching. He is in the annals of consultancy in Italy and abroad. He writes, warns, publishes. And, when necessary, he debunks theories.
Professor, is there anything plausible about the graphene, or other unidentified nanomaterial, injected to control us?
“As always happens when one of these legends, or rather technological lies, is produced, there is some truth to it. There is no material, or device, at the nanoscale, or a billionth of a meter, that can control us. This is a total hoax. Instead it is true that we have been working on the development of for many years nanobots, robots of dimensions of a few nanometers, designed to be inserted into the body of a living being to diagnose and treat diseases. Nanobots have been tested, capable of controlling the state of health by diagnosing any problems in time, for example programmed to recognize tumor cells and to inject substances on their surface capable of isolating the diseased cells, blocking their blood flow and therefore the their further dissemination and replication. Or micro-machines, 0,1-10 micrometers in size, equal to or smaller than those of a common red blood cell, controlled remotely, for advanced non-invasive surgery. The usual sly guy read the news, extended everything to vaccines against Covid19, building a beautiful and terrifying narrative and there are always those who fall for it. It's about the ancient three card game revised and perfected. Two cards lose, one wins. Two lies and one true thing. When it is identified, before being able to discover the card, the cheater in turn changes the position of the card on the table”.
How then to understand if someone tells us lies, half-truths or true things?
"Easy. Just spend some time fiddling with no matter what digital device: PC, tablet, mobile phone and search the net. Or use search engines. Warning: before doing this you need to activate the brain. It is not enough to find and read the first thing that is found. You have to read several of them, identify the discrepancies, check if the publisher is a prestigious scientific journal. It is necessary ask questions and seek answers convincing: when the news was published, by whom, subjected to trial inter pairs, on what date? News resumed when? From who? Why? We need to put ourselves in Sherlock Holmes' shoes, look for evidence, deduce motivation, identify, if any, the culprits of information disturbance”.
Social networks have their responsibility in spreading fake news. Heavy, some say. Is that so?
“Social networks are a medium, a vector of information. They are a technology, therefore by definition neutral. The responsibility lies with those who use them for criminal purposes. Let me be very clear: manipulating information, inducing dangerous behavior for oneself and for others, calling for subversion, are criminal behaviors.
Let no one say that they are innocent jokes, unwanted mistakes. Certainly social media is a coveted stage. Many are looking for the additional like. Presenting and sharing invented theories feeds a feeling of independence and control, moving individuals from the humble periphery of knowledge and understanding to a central, privileged position among those who know and share the same "truth". The alternative of the vaccine conspiracy is embraced, claiming, by appealing to individual common sense, to be rational. Obviously denying, at the same time, the collective rationality of the scientific community".
And how to understand if the representation is perhaps false but still sincere or if someone really wants to cheat us?
“Representation is always and in any case a fraud if it is not based on factual data, experimental evidence, and explicitly shared logical inferences. Good to have in mind, to recognize them, the storytelling techniques of storytellers, more or less conspiracy theorists. First technique: never original experimental tests, but only criticism and manipulation than what others have done. Second: giving false certainties, completely absolute and not open to criticism. Third: report statements, totally out of context, by famous people and experts. Fourth: use the "one hundred thousand" trick. A person is quoted, with bombastic and not always true credentials, implying, or leaving the deduction to the reader, that he represents the shared opinion of the entire community to which he belongs.
The fifth technique is that of the "rich name I stick in it": stuffing the narrative with high-sounding physical principles. Sixth: declare the incompleteness of the information reported to give strength to the pseudo-evidence. This is the use of the abduction mechanism, i.e. drawing deductions from non-existent elements. Seventh technique, that of the fake anecdotes. It should be emphasized that there is no good faith when manipulating others, no matter how noble the author thinks the end is. He practices to be condemned always and in any case. Doing good only generates damage.
Preachers, prophets, fanta-, para- and pseudo-scientists, even if they are only a minority, sometimes even amusing, on the margins of the rational world, cannot be considered a folkloric expression. They can do big, huge damage. It is necessary to defend and value hard-won knowledge through the commitment of individual lives and the collective efforts of generations dedicated to its research. If all narratives are considered equal, any story has no value. It would be an unacceptable catastrophe."
But who can have an advantage in spreading fake news?
“Aspiring gurus, failed hucksters, prophets in search of success. Anyone looking for a easy way to make money, of conquering a quarter of an hour of fame by haranguing the crowd from a stage, telling nonsense from the small screen. Thanks to COVID 19 there are those who have made a lot of money. Just read what the -few-repentant -NoVax say. As usual, just search on the net”.
Does the scientific community do enough to help us avoid falling into the trap of fake news or does it perhaps have some responsibility too?
“Science is not always intuitive, sometimes it is difficult, however it requires study, training, effort, time. It is therefore not surprising that we are looking for ways of thinking that do not ask us to come to terms with science. However the scientific community does not do enough, especially in a country like ours where science is hardly recognized as part of culture. We have not yet resolved the dispute between humanistic and scientific culture. It suffices to see how secondary education is considered. Anyone who attends the Liceo Classico is an intellectual aristocrat, whoever studies at the Scientifico is because he is not intelligent enough to follow the Classico. Let's not talk about technical institutes... repeating that it is total idiocy is of little use. The beliefs of the Italian mother are granite”.
Where to start to correct the shot?
“The scientific community, or rather its spokespersons, must learn to speak, because dissemination is difficult, almost as difficult as understanding when to do it. The first ladies are always lurking. The quarter of an hour of fame also appeals to those involved in science. The rant is always around the corner. Despite this I do not suggest keeping silent, because the silence breeds fear, but we must learn to say: ”we don't know. We don't know the answer." Always adding: “for now…”. In this way you avoid saying and contradicting, a dynamic that always reduces trust and respect".
Is it time to think of a few more rules? And how?
“Rules are useful when you want to reduce chaos in complex and non-linear situations, or when dealing with linear, known phenomena. They must be codified, recognized and respected. There must be penalties for those who break them. In our case we should not think of new or more stringent rules. We need education and training. For the public, for those who speak to the public. Education implies knowing how to speak and what to say, but also and above all mutual respect. Something that is chronically lacking in our country. Training means more school and better school, without distinction between humanistic, scientific and technological culture. If you don't know what you're talking about, it's easy to improvise philosophers, scientists or great technicians. Above all, we need a sense of the state, a sense of belonging to a community, a sense of civic duty".
