ABC says conspiracy web sites are contributing to mental health issues

reply to post by Yoda411


I would suggest that the majority of readers came away from that article with no idea that ATS exists.

But knowing that Icke exists, and tells people that malevolent Reptilians are controlling our leaders. And that the online conspiracy community believes this.

People who post comments are likely to be the ones who react strongly to an article – in this case, that will tend to be people who consider themselves involved with the online conspiracy community.

The people I worry about are the ones who never thought about it until they read this article, and now have a very biased view of conspiracy theories.

I'm not quite sure how to say more clearly that I'm not talking about particulars or percentages – I'm talking about subjective impressions.

Like what the advertising industry does, or political image doctors. It's not about what you say, but how you say it. And if you really think that's unimportant, why are billions of dollars spent on advertising and spin control?

Originally posted by Yoda411
Merely a risk of causing a further delusional and paranoid point of view. From there, what acts an individual commits under this delusional state of mind could also potentially be linked to a conspiracy theory (regardless of the source).

I respectfully have to disagree. This statement seems to show a lack of fundamental understanding of mental illness and how they manifest themselves, what causes them, and how they are expressed. Honestly, I am not trying to be rude or insult you. I am just guessing that you may not be a trained professional in this particular field.

reply to post by Flighty


I'm not even taking that comment seriously. This isn't Communist China, this is ABC America, NYC.

Originally posted by Yoda411

Originally posted by meadowfairy
Yoda once again what is the cure or even better what do you propose should be done for those delusional people who believe in such theories to further fuel their illness?

Do you intend to further fuel their illness or cure it?

Of course you mean to cure it. Go ahead and throw an example at me, and I will give you my professional [unprofessional] opinion.

Asking a question within a question nice.

OK you said that you agree sites like this should not be shut down. So what do you propose is the answer for these individuals? I dont mean cure in the sense for their illness but what do you believe the article suggests should be done for them?

As for your returned question. Neither, what other individuals come away with is their personal business and i for one like to be an open minded person on the internet. Do i believe everything i read no but yet i dont discriminate and shut them down.

[edit on 15-12-2008 by meadowfairy]

reply to post by angel of lightangelo

...People no longer care if the news has facts or is true or reports anything accurately, just that it entertains and says things that sound cool and might be true...

well, the need for titillation does seem pretty out there these days. So, competing for a piece of the pie does force the "news" to go that extra mile to sell a story

it does seem that we are willing to give them a pass if "it might be true"

love that

so, if your audience doesn't care - why should you?

thing is - this sort of BS gives real journalists everywhere an objective that's almost impossible to reach - to accurately, honestly and unbiasedly report the news - and get anyone anywhere to pay the least bit of attention to it

reply to post by Yoda411


I did say a variation on the story....
Don't you find it a coincidence that this comes out now, when similiar tactics are already happening elsewhere around the world?
People who question the government are being labelled as unstable/psychotic/mentally ill?
I think the parallels, if nothing else, are obvious.

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
thing is - this sort of BS gives real journalists everywhere an objective that's almost impossible to reach - to accurately, honestly and unbiasedly report the news - and get anyone anywhere to pay the least bit of attention to it

I guess I am just not sure what scares me more- the fact that this is what "news" is becoming or the fact that people have no problem admitting they like the news asking good questions.

The news asking questions - Sounds nice but the news is supposed to answer questions, not ask them to us. If they have a question about this, they are supposed to research it and present the facts that they find, objectively. Aren't they?

[edit on 15-12-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

Originally posted by americandingbat
reply to post by Yoda411

 

The people I worry about are the ones who never thought about it until they read this article, and now have a very biased view of conspiracy theories.

I'm not quite sure how to say more clearly that I'm not talking about particulars or percentages – I'm talking about subjective impressions.

Like what the advertising industry does, or political image doctors. It's not about what you say, but how you say it. And if you really think that's unimportant, why are billions of dollars spent on advertising and spin control?

So let me get this straight. You are concerned that people may have walked away from this article with a biased view on conspiracy theories, yet you are not concerned about your fellow ATS members who could be facing real paranoid delusions? They aren't going to walk out and tell you they are delusional, because they don't know it yet .

Advertising absolutely tries their best to gain an immediate and constant subjective impression. While this article immediately raises a lot of questions, you are open to draw your own assumptions as you would be by reading a thread on ATS. While you expect the source to be less bias in an article, it is backed up by the support of two psychological professionals.

This article would admittedly be baseless if the editor had not interviewed two scientifically accredited professionals surrounding the psychology of conspiracy theories. At least one of the individuals I have factually quoted to have mentioned the potential of positive therapy through group conspiracy discussion.

Originally posted by meadowfairy
Asking a question within a question nice.

OK you said that you agree sites like this should not be shut down. So what do you propose is the answer for these individuals? I dont mean cure in the sense for their illness but what do you believe the article suggests should be done for them?

As for your returned question. Neither, what other individuals come away with is their personal business and i for one like to be an open minded person on the internet. Do i believe everything i read no but yet i dont discriminate and shut them down.

[edit on 15-12-2008 by meadowfairy]

I believe the only way to beat a delusion is with irrefutable education, facts, and books labeled non-fiction which cover the subject matter at hand.

Originally posted by Yoda411
This article would admittedly be baseless if the editor had not interviewed two scientifically accredited professionals surrounding the psychology of conspiracy theories.

I tried, I really did.

At least one of the individuals I have factually quoted to have mentioned the potential of positive therapy through group conspiracy discussion.

Please clarify as your sentence does not make sense as written.

[edit on 15-12-2008 by angel of lightangelo]

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo
The news asking questions - Sounds nice but the news is supposed to answer questions, not ask them to us. If they have a question about this, they are supposed to research it and present the facts that they find, objectively. Aren't they?

Maybe they are asking you specifically lightangelo, "What's Behind Internet Conspiracy Empires?". Surely Lauren Cox does not participate in this online discussion, nor do the two interviewed psychologists. They merely opened the door for discussion surrounding the topic. Many articles in Scientific American raise thousands more questions than they answer. Unfortunately, that is the way science often works.

reply to post by angel of lightangelo


This is undoubtedly the second time I had to grab this quote for you specifically. Write it down.

For the healthy in mind, MacDonald said, "it's a wild card about whether this is going to improve people's state or not. It may turn out that the value of the community is greater than the destructive nature of the narratives that are spun out of them.

Originally posted by Yoda411

Originally posted by meadowfairy
Asking a question within a question nice.

OK you said that you agree sites like this should not be shut down. So what do you propose is the answer for these individuals? I dont mean cure in the sense for their illness but what do you believe the article suggests should be done for them?

As for your returned question. Neither, what other individuals come away with is their personal business and i for one like to be an open minded person on the internet. Do i believe everything i read no but yet i dont discriminate and shut them down.

[edit on 15-12-2008 by meadowfairy]

I believe the only way to beat a delusion is with irrefutable education, facts, and books labeled non-fiction which cover the subject matter at hand.

I believe this is already being done and not everyone who views or replies in a topic believes in it.

Let me take a moment to ask you all a question before this redundancy continues. Let's keep it fresh.

If this article were proven to be true, would it still be Lauren Cox's (or ABC's) opinion which was being pushed onto the reader?

Well firstly i dont know if there is a basis to prove it for msm readers when the basic idea for msm readers is that it is pushed onto them as truth, yanks onto their emotions and they come away with believing the professional only because they are a professional with credentials we should believe them is that right?

[edit on 15-12-2008 by meadowfairy]

reply to post by Yoda411

So let me get this straight. You are concerned that people may have walked away from this article with a biased view on conspiracy theories, yet you are not concerned about your fellow ATS members who could be facing real paranoid delusions?

now, that's some real fine baiting there

how concerned are you?

what do you propose that we - they - you - anybody - do about it?

which threads should we cut?

or, how should they be modified?

This article would admittedly be baseless if the editor had not interviewed two scientifically accredited professionals surrounding the psychology of conspiracy theories.

pretty sure the editor didn't interview anyone connected with this article - not even the reporter

Originally posted by meadowfairy
Well firstly i dont know if there is a basis to prove it for msm readers when the basic idea for msm readers is that it is pushed onto them as truth.

It would only take one individual who has been negatively affected mentally by what he/she has read on ATS. This would prove the connection between mental disorders and unfounded conspiracy theories.

If it happened, and we found a handful of them, would that make this article fact or opinion?

reply to post by Yoda411


That one professional opinion refers to the mentally well, not the mentally ill. So he's saying that it is possible that conspiracy sites might benefit the mentally healthy – despite the "destructive nature of the narratives that are spun out of them," although it is as he puts it "a wild card" in "a domain that didn't need more wild cards."

Okay, so not only do conspiracy websites contribute to mental illness among the predisposed, but it is "a wild card" among the non-predisposed?

And that's what you're saying balances the bias?

Unless the author had to produce the article in under a half hour, she surely would have found that the two sites she refers to – David Icke's and the gang stalking community – are not representative examples. So she has chosen them to highlight, why?

I am of course concerned about anyone online or off who suffers from delusional mental illnesses – it is a terrible life for many. I'm not sure what that has to do with it?

I admit I have limited experience in the issue (one friend who became convinced that her boyfriend was trying to kill her, my grandfather who keeps getting all hopped up on morphine in the hospital and calling the cops to report the conspiracies among the nursing staff, that's about it). But that experience suggests that it doesn't matter what the delusional person is reading.

The biggest difference between the ABC article and a thread at ATS is its presentation to the public as a news piece, and the presumption the news media expects from the public that they are authorities on what is true.

If someone posts on ATS that conspiracy websites cause mental illness (which does happen ) I will argue the point in that thread, but I will not be concerned that it was propaganda designed to affect the general public.

Because this was a news outlet (and despite what we here at ATS may think of ABC, they are still generally regarded as a legitimate news organization by most Americans) I am concerned about the impression the article gives, and concerned about what it means that they choose to spin the issue the way they do.

Originally posted by Yoda411

Originally posted by meadowfairy
Well firstly i dont know if there is a basis to prove it for msm readers when the basic idea for msm readers is that it is pushed onto them as truth.

It would only take one individual who has been negatively affected mentally by what he/she has read on ATS. This would prove the connection between mental disorders and unfounded conspiracy theories.

If it happened, and we found a handful of them, would that make this article fact or opinion?

Good question. First of all it would not make the article fact because the facts and details should ahve been proven already and backed up with such statistics, evidence and other sources off information especially for and against.

Originally posted by americandingbat
reply to post by Yoda411

 

I admit I have limited experience in the issue (one friend who became convinced that her boyfriend was trying to kill her, my grandfather who keeps getting all hopped up on morphine in the hospital and calling the cops to report the conspiracies among the nursing staff, that's about it). But that experience suggests that it doesn't matter what the delusional person is reading.

Thank you for providing an example.

Let me ask you, what do you think the effects would be if your grandfather read somewhere that the nursing staff are all reptilians and they are feeding him morphine so he doesn't find out?

His delusions of reality would be further distorted, and potentially concreted into his mind if the source of the article were credible enough for him to believe.

Whether or not this article is opinion we can debate, but I am interested in the potential of this being true.

(no offense seriously about your grandfather)

[edit on 12/15/08 by Yoda411]