De/politisering van de Waarheid: Complottheorieën, alternatieve feiten en nepnieuws in het tijdperk van de postwaarheid
Abstract
The Truth dominates many public discussions today. Conventional truths from established epistemic authorities about all sorts of issues, from climate change to terrorist attacks, are increasingly challenged by ordinary citizens and presidents alike. Many have therefore proclaimed that we have entered a post-truth era: a world in which objective facts are no longer relevant. Media and politics speak in alarmist discourse about how fake news, conspiracy theories and alternative facts threaten democratic societies by destabilizing the Truth ‐ a clear sign of a moral panic. In this essay, I firstly explore what sociological changes have led to (so much commotion about) the alleged demise of the Truth. In contrast to the idea that we have moved beyond it, I argue that we are amidst public battles about the Truth: at stake is who gets to decide over that and why. I then discuss and criticize the dominant counter reaction (re-establishing the idea of one objective and irrefutable truth), which I see as an unsuccessful de-politisation strategy. Basing myself on research and experiments with epistemic democracy in the field of science studies, I end with a more effective and democratic alternative of how to deal with knowledge in the complex information landscape of today.
Links
algoritmes, conspiracy theories, Fake news, fakenews, Freedom of expression, frontpage
Bibtex
Article{Harambam2017,
title = {De/politisering van de Waarheid: Complottheorieën, alternatieve feiten en nepnieuws in het tijdperk van de postwaarheid},
author = {Harambam, J.},
url = {https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/aup/soc/2017/00000013/00000001/art00007#},
doi = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5117/SOC2017.1.HARA},
year = {1123},
date = {2018-11-23},
journal = {Sociologie},
volume = {13},
number = {1},
pages = {73-92},
abstract = {The Truth dominates many public discussions today. Conventional truths from established epistemic authorities about all sorts of issues, from climate change to terrorist attacks, are increasingly challenged by ordinary citizens and presidents alike. Many have therefore proclaimed that we have entered a post-truth era: a world in which objective facts are no longer relevant. Media and politics speak in alarmist discourse about how fake news, conspiracy theories and alternative facts threaten democratic societies by destabilizing the Truth ‐ a clear sign of a moral panic. In this essay, I firstly explore what sociological changes have led to (so much commotion about) the alleged demise of the Truth. In contrast to the idea that we have moved beyond it, I argue that we are amidst public battles about the Truth: at stake is who gets to decide over that and why. I then discuss and criticize the dominant counter reaction (re-establishing the idea of one objective and irrefutable truth), which I see as an unsuccessful de-politisation strategy. Basing myself on research and experiments with epistemic democracy in the field of science studies, I end with a more effective and democratic alternative of how to deal with knowledge in the complex information landscape of today.},
keywords = {algoritmes, conspiracy theories, Fake news, fakenews, Freedom of expression, frontpage},
}