That’s the essence of the old TV cop show, Dragnet,“just the facts.” They, as police officers, were only interested in the facts of the case, not opinion or conjecture or rhetoric. And as Jefferson said, ““Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.”
So you’d think that fact-checking groups would be a helpful addition to the political process, zinging both sides of the spectrum after speeches or during them. Can you imagine the potential effect of real-time fact-checking scrolling across the screen as politicians speak? Wouldn’t that be awesome?
Well, it turns out the answer is no, it wouldn’t be. In a series of studies at the University of Michigan in 2005 & 2006, (I added the bolding. The source is the Boston Globe. It’s a good read. The Globe is still one of the best papers. in print or online.)
when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.
Turns out that the fact is that facts backfire.
“Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be,” read a recent Onion headline. Like the best satire, this nasty little gem elicits a laugh, which is then promptly muffled by the queasy feeling of recognition. The last five decades of political science have definitively established that most modern-day Americans lack even a basic understanding of how their country works. In 1996, Princeton University’s Larry M. Bartels argued, “the political ignorance of the American voter is one of the best documented data in political science.”
“The general idea is that it’s absolutely threatening to admit you’re wrong,” says political scientist Brendan Nyhan, the lead researcher on the Michigan study. The phenomenon — known as “backfire” — is “a natural defense mechanism to avoid that cognitive dissonance.”
Other things they noticed:
- The people who felt they were the most confident in their beliefs actually knew the least.
- The more people cared about the topic in question, the stronger the backfire
- It was spectrum-independent. Conservatives that believed there were WMDs in Iraq continued to believe that even after none were found. Liberals who believed the Bush administration ended stem cell research ignored that the ruling allowed research in some areas.
- People who do not feel good about themselves are less likely to be influenced by facts
- Politically sophisticated thinkers were even less open to new information than less sophisticated types. They may be right on 90% of what they know and totally off-base on the other 10%, but they ain’t budging from that 10%.