May 28, 2025 • 39 mins
Have you ever wondered why smart, rational people believe things that aren't true? This episode explores why humans are vulnerable to misinformation and looks into the psychological factors that make us believe misinformation. Canadian author and legal professor Timothy Caulfield is back to discuss why so many of us vulnerable to believing fake news and the power of the pause, when it comes to your scrolling habits.
We later welcome guest Michael Kropveld, Founder and Executive Director of Info-Secte / Info-Cult, who has decades of experience in researching and assisting cults. Michael shares in-depth insights on human vulnerabilities and how to respond.
Visit https://www.infosecte.org/ for more resources to safeguard yourself against misinformation.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Takara Small (00:03):
I want you to think about a lie that you
believed, and why.
Maybe it was Santa Claus.
Maybe you actually believe thatthat special someone wasn't
texting back because they reallywere busy at work or, better
yet, washing their hair.
Or maybe you believed LanceArmstrong was just that good at
(00:27):
cycling In all seven of yourTour de France victories.
Did you ever take bannedsubstances or blood dope?
Yes, sometimes I even believemy own misinformation.
I am totally going to reduce myscreen time starting on Monday.
Soundbite (Jonathan Frakes (00:47):
It's a total fabrication.
Takara Small (00:49):
Sadly, it can get a lot more sinister than those
examples.
With organized disinformationnetworks now firmly embedded in
politics, I want to explore whatmakes people believe things
that are clearly not true.
Sound bite (01:07):
It's Russian and Ukraine war.
It's fake.
The government actively usedseed clouding.
I think the earth is flat.
Takara Small (01:16):
Every day, we encounter headlines, social
media posts and viral videosthat blur the line between fact
and fiction.
What we choose to believe oftendepends on our emotions.
Does it speak to our tribalallegiance, our grievances, our
hopes?
Timothy Caulfield (01:35):
If it feels like your team just scored a
touchdown, that should be areason to pause.
Takara Small (01:42):
We love that feeling that our group is right.
From the influence of familyand friends to online echo
chambers, our desire to belongand connect can sometimes
override our critical thinkingskills, and, in a world where
algorithms are designed to keepus engaged, it's easier than
(02:06):
ever to get swept up in a tideof misinformation, often without
even realizing it.
This week, on what's Up withthe Internet, we're going to
talk about this human factor andwhy so many people believe lies
.
Why so many people believe lies.
(02:28):
I'm your host, Takara Small,and the podcast is brought to
you by CIRA, the CanadianInternet Registration Authority,
the non-profit building atrusted internet for Canadians.
Let's get started.
We have the author, TimCaulfield, back again.
We spoke to Tim on last week'sepisode's, a professor at the
university of Alberta and anexpert on myths and
disinformation.
(02:48):
We asked him to help us withthe big question just why are so
many of us vulnerable to thisstuff?
Timothy Caulfield (02:58):
yeah, I mean, you could do a whole semester
on that topic, right, and Ithink the the big caveat out of
the gate is that we're allsusceptible, right, all of us.
You know, in the book, and whenI give talks in this topic, I
always highlight, I keep a listof stuff I've fallen for.
(03:18):
Look, I study misinformation.
I'm hypersensitive to thereality that misinformation is
out there and I've fallen for it.
And I've fallen for it in kindof a cliche, classic way.
You know, misinformation thatplayed to my preconceived
notions, that played to my rage,that kind of played to my tribe
, right, I've fallen for it.
And so I think it's reallyimportant to recognize that we
(03:42):
all can fall for it, so we canbring a little bit of empathy to
the table.
The other thing to recognizeand this goes to that the
political dimension is that doeshappen across the ideological
spectrum and historically, formost of my career actually, the
misinformation came more fromthe left, not from the right,
and most of my hate mail used tocome from the left and not the
(04:03):
right.
So it's a good mail used tocome from the left and not the
right, so it's good to remindourselves of that too.
Right, context and timing andhistory it matters.
The other thing to remindourselves of is that
vulnerabilities matter, right.
So there's really interestingresearch that talks about being,
you know, economically insecuremight make you more vulnerable
to misinformation.
(04:23):
Mental health challenges mightmake you more vulnerable to
misinformation.
Mental health challenges canmake you more vulnerable to
misinformation.
And yes, of course you know,education, critical thinking
skills those kinds of variablesmatter a whole bunch, a whole
bunch too.
So all of those things you knowcombine, I think, to make us
all vulnerable.
(04:44):
So all of those things you knowcombine, I think, to make us
all vulnerable.
But one of the most importantfactors we talked about it right
off at the top is just howchaotic our information
environment is, and I thinkthat's one of the reasons we're
all so incredibly vulnerable,because we just can't process
absolutely everything.
So it's easy to fall intomisinformation traps, it's easy
(05:05):
to fall into echo chambers, andso many of us do it.
So try to bring to the tablescientific humility.
I talk about that in the book.
I think that's a reallyimportant trait.
Recognize that.
It's okay to change your mindbased on the evolution of
evidence.
It's okay to change your mindbased on the evolution of
evidence.
It's okay to change your mindwhen you learn more about a
(05:29):
topic.
So often in our society that'ssort of demonized.
It's flip-flopping.
You're not staying true to yourvalues.
If you change your mind, you'reletting your team down.
If you change your mind, youhave to jettison, I think, all
those attitudes and really weneed to embrace the idea that it
(05:52):
should be a badge of honor tochange your mind if the facts
change or if you learn more on atopic.
And in the book I have a listof things I've changed my mind
on based to the evolution offacts, and I think that that's a
really healthy, healthyposition to be in.
Takara Small (06:05):
You mentioned emotions like fear and anger.
They can leave us open tomisinformation.
So I have to ask now how do weguard against those emotions
pushing us to misinformation andother areas and venues
connected to that?
Timothy Caulfield (06:22):
Yeah, I wrote a piece not that long ago where
I argued that we're living in afear-demic right Because it is
such a powerful emotion and, asI said, I wrap up rage and
grievance and all those kinds oflike emotions in the same
bundle.
I think step one is justrecognizing the degree to which
(06:43):
our information environment isnow, you know, wired to play to
those emotions, right?
So I think that that's, I think, step one.
There was a.
I asked one of my colleagues,kate Starbird.
She's a professor who studiesmisinformation at the University
of Washington in Seattle, and Iactually asked her you know, as
(07:03):
this renowned expert onfighting misinformation, what
advice would you give to thepublic?
And I kind of thought she'd saywell, fact checking, and make
sure your critical thinkingskills are topped up.
And her response was well, Ithink the best advice is if it
feels like your team just scoreda touchdown, that should be a
reason to pause, that should bea red flag.
(07:25):
Or if it feels like the otherteam just scored a touchdown and
you feel very angry, thatshould be a red flag.
And, of course, what she meansby that is if the information is
playing to your emotions,playing to your political
ideology playing to your youknow, all of those things that
should be a red flag, and I lovethat, that bit of advice.
(07:46):
The other thing that's even moresimple and this is researched
by people like Gordon Pennycookand David Rand at MIT, gordon's
at Cornell he used to be atUniversity of Regina and we've
collaborated with him is thisidea of pausing, taking, you
know, just a beat and I knowthat sounds ridiculously simple,
but there have been, you know,this is work that's been
(08:08):
replicated by other laboratoriesand they find, if you just take
a moment after you see aheadline or something, just
pause they call it an accuracynudge you're less likely to
believe misinformation and lesslikely to spread it.
And I think what's going onthere is there.
It's inviting you to kind ofdisconnect from your initial
emotional response and kind ofturn to your more logical
(08:30):
critical thinking tools toevaluate that headline on your
phone.
I love that advice.
It's simple, it'sstraightforward, it's something
we can all do and it might bescalable.
Takara Small (08:41):
You've talked in the past about celebrities and
influencers who have had such animpact in how people view the
world, and misinformation.
I'm really curious to know howthat even happens, just taking
into account that people willdisregard, perhaps, the views
and the support systems andinformation coming from those
(09:04):
they love, those they choose tohave in their lives, for
sometimes what to me appears tobe blatant lies from a celebrity
that they don't even know.
Timothy Caulfield (09:18):
And you're right about that.
You know some research researchbacks that up, I think.
I think you know let's look atsomeone like Gwyneth Paltrow,
who you know she's aninteresting case study, you know
.
First off, you know used her asa case study in the past, so
it's easy for me to turn to heras an example.
But I think she's a good onebecause, you know, early in her
(09:41):
career with Goop, when shebecame kind of a health
influencer, it almost seemedlike a noble pursuit.
You know Dr Oz too, you know Iput him in this same camp.
They were, you know, they wereinviting us to consider other
ways of knowing.
And they were saying look,women have been mistreated by
(10:01):
the healthcare system.
True, they haven't done enoughresearch on women in the
biomedical sphere.
Absolutely true.
People of colour aredisregarded and their problems
aren't listened to.
Absolutely true.
And so there was almost thisentry point for a lot of these
(10:22):
influencers that seemed not justbenign but almost, as I said,
noble.
It was a good and that made youthe baddie if you were
critiquing them.
And holy cow, that tolerancefor pseudoscience, that
tolerance for misinformation, Ithink has we're unfortunately
(10:45):
paying for it now.
Right, and I think thatcelebrities, and you know, from
Dr Oz to Gwyneth Paltrow, to TomBrady, you know Jessica Alba, I
can list, go on and on and on.
They help to normalize andlegitimize the embrace of
misinformation, not just in thehealth sphere but more broadly
(11:21):
right.
So I think that has an angerthat an individual is holding on
to that can make that voiceincredibly powerful in that
individual's lives.
Individuals like Joe Rogan haveso much sway, or Jordan
Peterson, right, they're playingto grievances and we know from
(11:44):
research that that can be anincredibly seductive, a very
powerful conduit ofmisinformation and that was tim
colfield, who has just publisheda new book about all the
conflicting information we findonline, called the certainty
illusion what you don't know andwhy it matters.
Takara Small (12:06):
We now go to montreal, where mike cropefield
is the executive director ofinfo cult, or infosect.
Mike has decades of experiencestudying cults and exploring why
people fall for them and how toget them out.
He spoke to us about humanvulnerabilities and how to
respond.
Michael Kropveld (12:27):
The question almost is like what is the needs
and what leads people to getinvolved in kind of groups,
subjects, belief systems whichpeople outside them find this
like?
Kind of groups, subjects,belief systems which people
outside them find this like kindof a disturbing, problematic,
erroneous and misinformation,disinformation, you know,
conspiracies, etc.
And I think you know, on asimple level, it's because of
(12:47):
the response to a need and abelief that people have at that
time.
And so you're looking at oftena transitory period in people's
lives where they become moreopen to certain ideas and
subjects where normally theywouldn't, and it also obviously
has to do with the times we livein as well.
So, and it's a variety, becausefor some situations, when you
(13:08):
talk about misinformation, uh,the people who may be, you know,
pushing out this kind ofinformation obviously don't
perceive it as misinformation.
Many of of the groups we dealwith, for example, have belief
systems or ideas that mostpeople would say is totally
erroneous, not factual, notsupported by any evidence, but
they firmly and truly believe it, which sometimes makes it more
(13:28):
easy for them to sell theirmessage to others because they
are so sincere and convinced.
Where the reality sometimes, Ithink, is most people in our
society a function between, Iwould say, the black and whites,
with a lot of great uncertainty, not sure ready to question and
are open.
And so, when confronted bysomebody who appears to seem to
(13:50):
know it all and is so sure,often we acquiesce, we, often
they well, maybe they're, maybethey're right, maybe I'm wrong,
maybe I don't know, and maybe Ishould like kind of listen more
closely to what they're saying.
But, as I said, it kind offalls into where the person or
the individual is at in theirlife kind of situation.
Takara Small (14:11):
Are there common psychological traits when it
comes to individuals that makethem more vulnerable to
misinformation?
Michael Kropveld (14:19):
I kind of look at it and say that people fall
into situations at more, let'ssay, dips or crisis periods in
their lives.
So, you know, is it meaning, youknow, a psychological trait
being that they're going througha very stressful, complex and
difficult period in their life?
This, yes, would make them moresusceptible and more open to
(14:41):
buying into sort of ideas andbeliefs that they previously
would not have, let's say,accepted or believed.
So that's where I would look atit.
More is understanding that whenyou go through kind of a
difficult or crisis period inyour life, you're more open to
what I almost in a simple way,say is the arm around your
shoulder saying you know what,don't worry about it, I'll take
(15:02):
care of it, I can explain it toyou and don't worry.
And I think so.
When people are going throughvery difficult times, the belief
that there's something orsomeone out there that can help
them or make sense of whatthey're going through and help
them to resolve it, I think canbe quite appealing.
But when you're not goingthrough that kind of difficult
period from the outside, youkind of scratch your head and
(15:25):
say you know what's going onhere.
Takara Small (15:27):
You mentioned that people can perhaps fall for
misinformation during vulnerabletimes in their lives or when
they're experiencing challenges,and I'm curious is there any
relationship to certaindemographics or ages that make
people that much more vulnerableas well?
Michael Kropveld (15:45):
Well, I think if you're kind of an adolescent
and you're going, let's say, 18to 26 year or even younger age
group, you're going through aprocess often of developing your
own identity and you know kindof contesting established kind
of beliefs and structures,whether it be your family,
society etc.
So therefore you're more openand more willing to make a
(16:08):
change and look at thingsdifferently.
And, as I said, you know, Ithink it basically from our
experience here is we've dealtwith people from right across
the spectrum and it's usuallybecause there's some kind of
issue going on.
It could be more of a part ofthe background or it can be just
at one point there's somethingthat happens which has kind of
(16:30):
caused a kind of a criticalsituation where they tend to be
much more open to it.
There's, I think, the desire tobelieve that certain people are
immune from, you know, problemsor difficulties in life,
whatever it may be.
I think is a necessary defense,because if you thought
everything that happened aroundyou would affect you, you
(16:50):
probably wouldn't walk out thedoor.
So I think there's a need todefend, so that you look at
situations like what we'rediscussing today and say, well,
this won't happen to me becauseI'm too bright, I'm educated, I
wouldn't fall for it.
I think the reality is youdon't know, and I think the kind
of studies and examples thatwe've had through our experience
(17:11):
demonstrates that it can happento anyone.
Anyone can be potentiallyvulnerable that it can happen to
anyone.
Anyone can potentiallyvulnerable.
Certain people, because ofcertain factors in their lives,
can make maybe we can say aremore susceptible or more open.
But generally I think is thereality is it can affect anyone.
Takara Small (17:30):
I do get a sense sometimes.
You know, when I'm interviewingpeople, when I'm reading up on
this subject matter, thatthere's a sense of belonging
associated with it and I'mwondering is there a desire for
community at the heart of this?
Michael Kropveld (17:44):
A big part, definitely.
When I broke it down verysimply, the need to believe and
the need to belong are verystrong components and I think in
pretty much everyone to be partof a group to have a kind of a
solid base of understandingwhat's happening around this in
the world.
So, yeah, I think that's veryimportant and going through
(18:04):
difficult times there'ssometimes is often more need to
kind of feeling that you belongto something, there is a support
system or people who see thingsthe same way as you.
Yeah, but those are very strong, I think, emotional components,
that needs that people have.
It's very hard, I mean, likeanything, you can't generalize
and apply it to everyone, butI'd say in a large percentage of
(18:28):
the population, the need tobelieve and belong are very
strong emotional pulls that drawyou into situations sometimes
that are not always, let's say,beneficial for you the hole
that's been left by religion incanada and you can argue overall
society.
Takara Small (18:47):
Has that had an effect at all?
Has that had an impact?
Michael Kropveld (18:51):
it has an impact to the degree that you
know.
Uh, there's a lot.
Let's say there's a period.
Let's say there's a periodwhere, let's say, I'm in Quebec
where the Catholic Church playsa very strong role in social,
political and religious spheresof people's lives, and the
dramatic change away from thatobviously led to kind of a
vacuum.
(19:11):
At the same time as a vacuumoccurs, it doesn't necessarily
mean it's getting filled bynecessarily negative kind of
movements or negativeorganizations.
But I think the reality is, whenpeople turn their back on
something and have a distrust orlack of faith in what they grew
up with or what they believedin, they become more open to
(19:32):
looking around them to see whatelse is there.
And unfortunately there arealso movements that will
capitalize on that need.
So it is a certain reality,definitely, that the lack or the
change in belief leads peopleto become more open to new
adventures, new spiritualexperiences, but not necessarily
(19:54):
just religious.
A lot of people have foundthat's a you know kind of home,
one would say, in differentother kinds of communal
organizations and groups, thatis spring up and one of the
things that you know we'll getto is the fact that people also
belonging, almost want to say tomovements that exist only
(20:14):
online and are not gettingtogether in person with people
that they used to, which is alsoa dramatic change from
basically where we started, wheneverything was face-to-face
kind of, and people werecommunally living together or
spending time together indifferent environments in
(20:36):
different environments.
Takara Small (20:38):
You mentioned how religion can sometimes create
fissions or fractures whichforce people to look for you
know, other support or othercommunities, particularly in
Canada, with a decrease inreligion playing a major role.
I'm curious Can you seesomething similar happening when
there's recessions or financial, global financial setbacks?
(20:58):
I mean, do you see that samefaith shaken to the core and
people seeking out some otherresource or faith?
Michael Kropveld (21:07):
Well, a lot of this is obviously tied to, you
know, what's going on in society.
In society I mean the rise ofdifferent kinds of movements.
You know, whether they be kindof positive or problematic.
You know, usually come at timeswhen there is a kind of social
upheaval, different stressfulsituations.
Obviously, I think there'shardly anybody that would say
that we are not going through avery kind of stressful, complex
(21:30):
and difficult times.
You know, over the last numberof years, you know previous even
to COVID, but since, and theincreased polarization that is
occurring in different societiesas well, all play a factor,
makes it more difficult forpeople to kind of feel, kind of
feel excuse me people that feelmore grounded and feel more
(21:53):
anchored to the society and feelmore comfortable with
themselves.
So there is that kind of liketendency at times like that to
look for a solution.
You know why am I having such ahard time?
why, you know, like financially,is it so difficult for me?
I need somebody to explain it,and what people tend to at that
those times look for is notcomplexity.
(22:14):
They don't want complexity.
You're looking for somebody totell them what's right, what's
wrong, how is it, how am I gonnaget you out of this mess?
Or by joining this group orgetting involved in this,
everything will work out.
It's kind of like the the needto believe in kind of almost a
miracle solution to difficulttimes and problems.
I mean, I mentioned this and itkind of an example comes to mind
(22:37):
.
It was somebody who I know yearsago who was a very skeptical
kind of person about all kind oflike different kind of faith,
healings et cetera and miraclecures.
But he ended up having heartproblems and the doctors were
telling me he would requireheart surgery and he told me at
that time he ended up going to asession being offered here
(22:59):
somewhere in Montreal aboutsomebody who could deal with
health problems without surgeryand he told me about this
experience and he said you knowwhat?
That was the first time I couldreally really personally relate
to the kind of work you'redoing, mike, because it was
appealing to want to believethat I could actually do
something like that and behealed.
(23:19):
Anyway, he ended up doing asurgery and he's okay, but I
think it kind of symbolized forme that kind of reality is like
when you're going through thatkind of difficult time,
sometimes you want to believethat there's something out there
that will offer you that kindof magical solution or a simple
formula or recipe that will takecare of what you're going
(23:40):
through.
Takara Small (23:42):
So there's something called the illusionary
truth effect and how that canmake certain ideas seem more
credible than they are.
Can you explain that to me?
Michael Kropveld (23:52):
Well, part of it, I think, with that is like
it's kind of repeated exposureto the same in quotation mark
lie or story.
You just hear it often enough.
Sometimes you end up doubtingyourself.
You know, especially if you'resurrounded by people who kind of
believe the same thing, you'reless likely over time to maybe
(24:14):
question or doubt it and say,well, maybe I'm wrong, maybe
these people are all right,since you're kind of being
bombarded constantly with thesame message.
And so that's where it becomesvery difficult, you know, for
people to step outside and sayyou know what, make a
concentrated effort to seek outother points of view and other
kind of positions, which doesn'toften happen.
(24:36):
That's like what happens thesedays is most people.
What they do is they end upgoing on the internet, and once
you go on the internet and youstart Googling a certain kind of
question or concern, you end upgoing down what people have
described as that rabbit hole ofconstantly finding things that
confirm or reinforce what youalready kind of believe or what
(24:56):
others around you are alreadybeen saying is the truth, which
you know, as your questionarises, how people end up buying
into the lie.
Takara Small (25:05):
One of the common aspects I'm seeing is the role
of emotion in all of this, andso what you know does fear,
anger, happiness.
How does that impact a person'sability to evaluate the
accuracy of what they're seeing,what they're believing?
Michael Kropveld (25:31):
And so when you kind of get emotionally
involved, as I mentioned, I likekind of using examples,
sometimes it kind of reminds me,like you know, if I'm talking
to you and I'm your best friend,and you tell me you fell in
love with John and I go, john,the guy is just out to get your
money.
He's a no good kind of guy andI expect you to say, oh me, mike
(25:52):
, you're right, I'm leaving himtomorrow and I'll go look for
another boyfriend Never going tohappen tomorrow and I'll go
look for another boyfriend nevergonna happen.
Because people kind of getinvolved, because it responds on
an emotional level.
You know, most people from theoutside look at and say, well,
this is not logical, thisdoesn't make any sense.
But emotionally it appeals topeople and it's kind of almost
you kind of love becomes blind.
And so you fall into this andyou get involved emotionally and
(26:16):
obviously in some movementswhere there's this kind of split
between we're the good guys andeverybody on the outside is bad
and evil and basically out toget you.
That creates the sense ofsometimes the fear of the other
and the fear of those outsidewho have a different perspective
or point of view.
So when you come to a degreeyou you know of coming to
believe, like the example of thelove relationship.
(26:39):
You know you're going to defendwhat you're doing and also be
very reluctant, and you know tocontain or to maintain or
continue, necessarily, arelationship with other people.
At the same time, when you getinto certain situations or
environments, you know, you cometo believe that you have found
the truth, example being duringthe COVID, you had a lot of
(27:01):
people, not just during COVIDbut also today, who bought into
different theories and ideas butended up feeling that they
found the truth.
Everyone on the outside waseither brainwashed or bought
into the system and followedmedia etc.
But they had found the truth andso there's a sense of for sure,
a lot of power and also, as onewould say, to a certain degree,
(27:24):
a certain happiness of havingdiscovered something unique and
other people were not aware of.
So gave them a certain sense ofpower and in certain movements
and belief systems.
I think it's important torecognize that that sense of
power, for people who don'tnecessarily feel they have much
power in their everyday lives,is something which is very
strong and is something thatmotivates them to continue and
(27:48):
also can generate a lot of angeragainst those who necessarily
oppose.
Because the general reactionyou know know, when people get
involved in certain systems ormovements which others don't
like is they will reactlogically or factually or kind
of confront the individual,which also generates anger in
the individual at the same time,which will also lead to often a
(28:12):
breakdown in communicationswith people who are close around
them.
Some systems you know that dealwith, especially during the
COVID period, pretty simplyencourage people just to cut off
contact with all people who didnot believe or think like them.
Takara Small (28:28):
I want to ask if there's anything we as a society
can do to counteract this.
Is there some type ofinoculation?
Michael Kropveld (28:36):
People always like to say well, education,
preventive education I mean,nobody's against education.
The question then comes is whatkind of education, to who's
carrying it out and what's yourultimate goal in doing it?
I definitely agree that one ofthe things that we should be
teaching more of is criticalthinking and giving people
(28:57):
access to how to figure out, howto assess information from
various sources, to questions toask.
Those are always things that Iwould agree with.
But fundamentally, the questionif you have problems that exist
in a society, where are theycoming from?
If the problem is that peoplefeel disaffected or disconnected
from mainline structures andsocieties that exist and that
(29:18):
could be political, religious,you know, mental health, medical
, etc.
Then the question is how do youreturn?
You know that kind of how doyou rebuild confidence for
people in the society they livein?
Not easy questions.
I don't have an easy answer howto do that, but I think it's
part of is recognizing that ifpeople don't trust, for example,
(29:38):
you're more comfortable withhearing.
You know this person is goingto give you what you want, even
(30:01):
though maybe it's never going tohappen.
So but ultimately I say, how doyou get to the root kind of
causes you know that's a muchmore difficult process, you know
.
I mean education is helpful.
How do you provide serviceswhen I think people are running
into difficulties and problem?
Yes, these are all questions Ithink most people might agree
(30:24):
with, but at the same time, isthis question is going to be
who's going to pay for it andwho's going to do it?
And when it comes down toquestions of who's going to pay,
there seems to very, verylittle money around to really
kind of deal with this, becausesome of it as mentioning when
you're looking at societalissues are not something that
gets resolved bang, bang, bang.
(30:45):
You know, and you know how longis going to take to get people's
confidence back in structuresand societies that we've built
up over.
You know, decades andgenerations?
I don't know.
I decades and generations?
I don't know.
I don't think it's an easy task.
It's not necessarily a task weshouldn't undertake, but I think
it's something that has to beseen as difficult but necessary.
Takara Small (31:11):
Is there anything in your opinion the government
can do better on this subject?
Michael Kropveld (31:17):
Is there anything in your opinion the
government can do better on thissubject?
Well, government, my experienceis because one person we talked
to in government said what canwe do around this issue?
Governments can do.
What they can do is they canmake laws.
I mean, I'm always hesitantwhen it comes to questions of
making laws, because thequestion is how much do you
(31:38):
really know about the issue youwant to make a law about?
And then, once you have the law, is it really going to be
effective in dealing with theproblem or is it just kind of,
let's say, you know making, youknow dressing, you know giving a
nice dressing to a subject butreally doesn't have much kind of
, let's say, beef or meat behindit?
(31:59):
I think part of it, a minimum,is recognizing, I think as a
part of government, that peopleare harmed by whether you want
to call it misinformation,disinformation.
You know radicalization,extremist groups.
You know extreme religious orhigh-control movements or
organizations in our society.
There are families andindividuals that are harmed,
that need help, and part of itis at least you don't have to
(32:23):
get into a discussion, do youagree, disagree with X or Y
perspective on an issue, butrecognize and I think most
people will is that, no matterwhat the group or society, some
people are harmed in these kindof movements and groups and in
some groups and movements morepeople are harmed than in others
and what they can do is providemore services to people.
(32:44):
When that happens, it's the sametime is, of course, trying to
address you know how to dealwith this kind of an issue in a
comprehensive way, Because itmeans to me bringing together
people from different kind ofspectrums and different kind of
sectors, rather, of society andlooking at okay, what is the
(33:04):
problem here?
There's a lot of research goingon dealing with radicalization,
misinformation, disinformation.
The question is how do youdevelop a policy to effectively
deal with these kind of concerns?
And I think you start thatprocess by bringing actors from
different sectors together andseeing what you can come up with
(33:24):
.
But at the same time, like Isay, because of where we work, I
would say, at least at the theminimum, recognize people are
harmed and that more servicesshould be offered to these
people, whether it be formermembers or families going
through, you know, distress atdifficult times because of
someone they care about.
You know.
Takara Small (33:41):
I think, at the minimum, that that's what can be
done, should be done, rather ifthere are listeners who are
tuning in and they have a familymember, or maybe even a loved
one, who was bought intomisinformation to a worrying
degree, what advice would yougive them?
Michael Kropveld (33:59):
Well, without knowing individual histories,
simple kind of what to do, whatnot to do, don't get into
logical, practical or factualdiscussions.
If somebody really believeswhat they believe, all they
probably do is look at you andsay you don't understand.
You're totally conned by theother side.
(34:19):
The issue is trying to, like Imentioned a while ago, is how do
you see the world through theeyes of the individual, so that
if you have an idea of who theyare, where they're coming from,
what the needs potentially arefor them believing in this, it
may be a better approach to lookat it and approach it on an
emotional level and basically,if you're concerned, expressing
(34:43):
your concern without gettinginto factual, saying look, I'm
really concerned, I don'tunderstand, especially if
there's been a dramatic changein their personality and their
beliefs.
I don't understand the process,what's happened and how you got
involved.
Can you explain it to me?
Explaining and wanting tounderstand does not mean that
(35:03):
you buying into it.
I am understand because I careabout you.
You know, ultimately it's notimportant.
Well, excuse me, not a questionof how important.
It's not whether or not Ibelieve or don't believe what
you're saying, because it's notme that's going to be living
with your decisions.
I'm trying to understand morewhat happened and the process
that you've gone through, and soyou want, you want to.
(35:26):
You know, what I'm saying hereis you want to keep it more on
an emotional level and reconnect.
We feel and obviously everyperson has to make their own
decision is maintainingcommunication and trying to
improve.
It is very important Becausewithout any contact or
communication, you have no ideawhat's going on with the person.
I say it's up to eachindividual or family member to
(35:51):
decide because you know anyadvice you get and people often,
when they call us, have gottenall kinds of different advice
from different people wementioned.
Look, whatever decision youmake in terms of how you want to
proceed, recognize that thosewho give you advice, the same
way as the person you care about, who's getting advice or
suggestions from others thoughthey're not the ones are going
(36:12):
to be living with your decision.
So if you want to do something,you have to look at the approach
you're taking.
Does it make sense and can youput it into practice?
And some people you know don'twant to do this.
Yeah, I mean, it's ourapproaches.
I think trying to understandnot necessarily, it's not a
question approach is, I thinktrying to understand not
necessarily it's not a question,do you agree or disagree?
(36:32):
But trying to understand whatsomeone's going through and then
looking at, how do you maintainthat communication and contact
with the individual andhopefully, you know, raising
questions which may elicit, youknow it's kind of a reflection
on their part.
I think you also want torecognize that you know better
(36:53):
off from a strategy point ofview is like what are you hoping
to achieve?
Is it feasible?
And if it's feasible, what arethe pros and cons of the
approaches you're going to take?
And look more closely at thecons of what you're planning,
because if things work out theway you want, you're always
happy.
If they don't, can you livewith the cons of what you're
planning?
Because if things work out theway you want, you're always
happy.
If they don't, can you livewith the consequences of having
(37:13):
something happen?
You know, and you know that'swhy you look at it from that
perspective.
But part of it is alsorecognizing that people are
different, so what brought theminto a situation can vary from
individual to individual.
There may be a background I needto believe you know.
So these are a lot of factors,but ultimately it's not
(37:34):
confronting the individual,because that pretty much doesn't
work and often will reinforcetheir conviction and belief,
because if I believe that I havethe right information and
you're the ones with the falseinformation, well you know I may
cut off from you.
So that's what you want to kindof avoid.
But, as I said, you have tofeel comfortable with that
(37:57):
approach and obviously eachfamily you know is different.
There's a lot of other factorsthat I deal with when I get into
situations with families, butusually don't attack the
individual, don't attack ifthey're involved in a group.
Don't attack the group.
If there's a leader, do notattack the leader of the group
(38:17):
either.
These are generally situationswhich will indirectly reinforce
their belief and faith andpossibly decrease the kind of
contact and create walls betweenyou and the person, walls which
make it different tocommunicate and keep in touch.
Takara Small (38:35):
And that was Mike Kropfeld, the executive director
of InfoCult or InfoSect, and ifyou want to visit their website
for resources, the link will bein the podcast description Next
week on episode four.
We want to help you guardagainst falling for any
misinformation yourself.
Timothy Caulfield (38:52):
If we're using AI tools to get
information, it's reallyimportant to understand what
they're good at and what they'rebad at.
Takara Small (39:01):
We'll be providing you with loads of great advice
to identify misinformation anddo your own fact checking.
Keep an eye out for that and ifyou want to reach out, you can
email us at podcast at xeroca.
You can also find me at TakaraSmall on Blue Sky Social and
Instagram.
Thank you for listening andwe'll see you next week.
I want you to think about a lie that you
believed, and why.
Maybe it was Santa Claus.
Maybe you actually believe thatthat special someone wasn't
texting back because they reallywere busy at work or, better
yet, washing their hair.
Or maybe you believed LanceArmstrong was just that good at
(00:27):
cycling In all seven of yourTour de France victories.
Did you ever take bannedsubstances or blood dope?
Yes, sometimes I even believemy own misinformation.
I am totally going to reduce myscreen time starting on Monday.
Soundbite (Jonathan Frakes (00:47):
It's a total fabrication.
Takara Small (00:49):
Sadly, it can get a lot more sinister than those
examples.
With organized disinformationnetworks now firmly embedded in
politics, I want to explore whatmakes people believe things
that are clearly not true.
Sound bite (01:07):
It's Russian and Ukraine war.
It's fake.
The government actively usedseed clouding.
I think the earth is flat.
Takara Small (01:16):
Every day, we encounter headlines, social
media posts and viral videosthat blur the line between fact
and fiction.
What we choose to believe oftendepends on our emotions.
Does it speak to our tribalallegiance, our grievances, our
hopes?
Timothy Caulfield (01:35):
If it feels like your team just scored a
touchdown, that should be areason to pause.
Takara Small (01:42):
We love that feeling that our group is right.
From the influence of familyand friends to online echo
chambers, our desire to belongand connect can sometimes
override our critical thinkingskills, and, in a world where
algorithms are designed to keepus engaged, it's easier than
(02:06):
ever to get swept up in a tideof misinformation, often without
even realizing it.
This week, on what's Up withthe Internet, we're going to
talk about this human factor andwhy so many people believe lies
.
Why so many people believe lies.
(02:28):
I'm your host, Takara Small,and the podcast is brought to
you by CIRA, the CanadianInternet Registration Authority,
the non-profit building atrusted internet for Canadians.
Let's get started.
We have the author, TimCaulfield, back again.
We spoke to Tim on last week'sepisode's, a professor at the
university of Alberta and anexpert on myths and
disinformation.
(02:48):
We asked him to help us withthe big question just why are so
many of us vulnerable to thisstuff?
Timothy Caulfield (02:58):
yeah, I mean, you could do a whole semester
on that topic, right, and Ithink the the big caveat out of
the gate is that we're allsusceptible, right, all of us.
You know, in the book, and whenI give talks in this topic, I
always highlight, I keep a listof stuff I've fallen for.
(03:18):
Look, I study misinformation.
I'm hypersensitive to thereality that misinformation is
out there and I've fallen for it.
And I've fallen for it in kindof a cliche, classic way.
You know, misinformation thatplayed to my preconceived
notions, that played to my rage,that kind of played to my tribe
, right, I've fallen for it.
And so I think it's reallyimportant to recognize that we
(03:42):
all can fall for it, so we canbring a little bit of empathy to
the table.
The other thing to recognizeand this goes to that the
political dimension is that doeshappen across the ideological
spectrum and historically, formost of my career actually, the
misinformation came more fromthe left, not from the right,
and most of my hate mail used tocome from the left and not the
(04:03):
right.
So it's a good mail used tocome from the left and not the
right, so it's good to remindourselves of that too.
Right, context and timing andhistory it matters.
The other thing to remindourselves of is that
vulnerabilities matter, right.
So there's really interestingresearch that talks about being,
you know, economically insecuremight make you more vulnerable
to misinformation.
(04:23):
Mental health challenges mightmake you more vulnerable to
misinformation.
Mental health challenges canmake you more vulnerable to
misinformation.
And yes, of course you know,education, critical thinking
skills those kinds of variablesmatter a whole bunch, a whole
bunch too.
So all of those things you knowcombine, I think, to make us
all vulnerable.
(04:44):
So all of those things you knowcombine, I think, to make us
all vulnerable.
But one of the most importantfactors we talked about it right
off at the top is just howchaotic our information
environment is, and I thinkthat's one of the reasons we're
all so incredibly vulnerable,because we just can't process
absolutely everything.
So it's easy to fall intomisinformation traps, it's easy
(05:05):
to fall into echo chambers, andso many of us do it.
So try to bring to the tablescientific humility.
I talk about that in the book.
I think that's a reallyimportant trait.
Recognize that.
It's okay to change your mindbased on the evolution of
evidence.
It's okay to change your mindbased on the evolution of
evidence.
It's okay to change your mindwhen you learn more about a
(05:29):
topic.
So often in our society that'ssort of demonized.
It's flip-flopping.
You're not staying true to yourvalues.
If you change your mind, you'reletting your team down.
If you change your mind, youhave to jettison, I think, all
those attitudes and really weneed to embrace the idea that it
(05:52):
should be a badge of honor tochange your mind if the facts
change or if you learn more on atopic.
And in the book I have a listof things I've changed my mind
on based to the evolution offacts, and I think that that's a
really healthy, healthyposition to be in.
Takara Small (06:05):
You mentioned emotions like fear and anger.
They can leave us open tomisinformation.
So I have to ask now how do weguard against those emotions
pushing us to misinformation andother areas and venues
connected to that?
Timothy Caulfield (06:22):
Yeah, I wrote a piece not that long ago where
I argued that we're living in afear-demic right Because it is
such a powerful emotion and, asI said, I wrap up rage and
grievance and all those kinds oflike emotions in the same
bundle.
I think step one is justrecognizing the degree to which
(06:43):
our information environment isnow, you know, wired to play to
those emotions, right?
So I think that that's, I think, step one.
There was a.
I asked one of my colleagues,kate Starbird.
She's a professor who studiesmisinformation at the University
of Washington in Seattle, and Iactually asked her you know, as
(07:03):
this renowned expert onfighting misinformation, what
advice would you give to thepublic?
And I kind of thought she'd saywell, fact checking, and make
sure your critical thinkingskills are topped up.
And her response was well, Ithink the best advice is if it
feels like your team just scoreda touchdown, that should be a
reason to pause, that should bea red flag.
(07:25):
Or if it feels like the otherteam just scored a touchdown and
you feel very angry, thatshould be a red flag.
And, of course, what she meansby that is if the information is
playing to your emotions,playing to your political
ideology playing to your youknow, all of those things that
should be a red flag, and I lovethat, that bit of advice.
(07:46):
The other thing that's even moresimple and this is researched
by people like Gordon Pennycookand David Rand at MIT, gordon's
at Cornell he used to be atUniversity of Regina and we've
collaborated with him is thisidea of pausing, taking, you
know, just a beat and I knowthat sounds ridiculously simple,
but there have been, you know,this is work that's been
(08:08):
replicated by other laboratoriesand they find, if you just take
a moment after you see aheadline or something, just
pause they call it an accuracynudge you're less likely to
believe misinformation and lesslikely to spread it.
And I think what's going onthere is there.
It's inviting you to kind ofdisconnect from your initial
emotional response and kind ofturn to your more logical
(08:30):
critical thinking tools toevaluate that headline on your
phone.
I love that advice.
It's simple, it'sstraightforward, it's something
we can all do and it might bescalable.
Takara Small (08:41):
You've talked in the past about celebrities and
influencers who have had such animpact in how people view the
world, and misinformation.
I'm really curious to know howthat even happens, just taking
into account that people willdisregard, perhaps, the views
and the support systems andinformation coming from those
(09:04):
they love, those they choose tohave in their lives, for
sometimes what to me appears tobe blatant lies from a celebrity
that they don't even know.
Timothy Caulfield (09:18):
And you're right about that.
You know some research researchbacks that up, I think.
I think you know let's look atsomeone like Gwyneth Paltrow,
who you know she's aninteresting case study, you know
.
First off, you know used her asa case study in the past, so
it's easy for me to turn to heras an example.
But I think she's a good onebecause, you know, early in her
(09:41):
career with Goop, when shebecame kind of a health
influencer, it almost seemedlike a noble pursuit.
You know Dr Oz too, you know Iput him in this same camp.
They were, you know, they wereinviting us to consider other
ways of knowing.
And they were saying look,women have been mistreated by
(10:01):
the healthcare system.
True, they haven't done enoughresearch on women in the
biomedical sphere.
Absolutely true.
People of colour aredisregarded and their problems
aren't listened to.
Absolutely true.
And so there was almost thisentry point for a lot of these
(10:22):
influencers that seemed not justbenign but almost, as I said,
noble.
It was a good and that made youthe baddie if you were
critiquing them.
And holy cow, that tolerancefor pseudoscience, that
tolerance for misinformation, Ithink has we're unfortunately
(10:45):
paying for it now.
Right, and I think thatcelebrities, and you know, from
Dr Oz to Gwyneth Paltrow, to TomBrady, you know Jessica Alba, I
can list, go on and on and on.
They help to normalize andlegitimize the embrace of
misinformation, not just in thehealth sphere but more broadly
(11:21):
right.
So I think that has an angerthat an individual is holding on
to that can make that voiceincredibly powerful in that
individual's lives.
Individuals like Joe Rogan haveso much sway, or Jordan
Peterson, right, they're playingto grievances and we know from
(11:44):
research that that can be anincredibly seductive, a very
powerful conduit ofmisinformation and that was tim
colfield, who has just publisheda new book about all the
conflicting information we findonline, called the certainty
illusion what you don't know andwhy it matters.
Takara Small (12:06):
We now go to montreal, where mike cropefield
is the executive director ofinfo cult, or infosect.
Mike has decades of experiencestudying cults and exploring why
people fall for them and how toget them out.
He spoke to us about humanvulnerabilities and how to
respond.
Michael Kropveld (12:27):
The question almost is like what is the needs
and what leads people to getinvolved in kind of groups,
subjects, belief systems whichpeople outside them find this
like?
Kind of groups, subjects,belief systems which people
outside them find this like kindof a disturbing, problematic,
erroneous and misinformation,disinformation, you know,
conspiracies, etc.
And I think you know, on asimple level, it's because of
(12:47):
the response to a need and abelief that people have at that
time.
And so you're looking at oftena transitory period in people's
lives where they become moreopen to certain ideas and
subjects where normally theywouldn't, and it also obviously
has to do with the times we livein as well.
So, and it's a variety, becausefor some situations, when you
(13:08):
talk about misinformation, uh,the people who may be, you know,
pushing out this kind ofinformation obviously don't
perceive it as misinformation.
Many of of the groups we dealwith, for example, have belief
systems or ideas that mostpeople would say is totally
erroneous, not factual, notsupported by any evidence, but
they firmly and truly believe it, which sometimes makes it more
(13:28):
easy for them to sell theirmessage to others because they
are so sincere and convinced.
Where the reality sometimes, Ithink, is most people in our
society a function between, Iwould say, the black and whites,
with a lot of great uncertainty, not sure ready to question and
are open.
And so, when confronted bysomebody who appears to seem to
(13:50):
know it all and is so sure,often we acquiesce, we, often
they well, maybe they're, maybethey're right, maybe I'm wrong,
maybe I don't know, and maybe Ishould like kind of listen more
closely to what they're saying.
But, as I said, it kind offalls into where the person or
the individual is at in theirlife kind of situation.
Takara Small (14:11):
Are there common psychological traits when it
comes to individuals that makethem more vulnerable to
misinformation?
Michael Kropveld (14:19):
I kind of look at it and say that people fall
into situations at more, let'ssay, dips or crisis periods in
their lives.
So, you know, is it meaning, youknow, a psychological trait
being that they're going througha very stressful, complex and
difficult period in their life?
This, yes, would make them moresusceptible and more open to
(14:41):
buying into sort of ideas andbeliefs that they previously
would not have, let's say,accepted or believed.
So that's where I would look atit.
More is understanding that whenyou go through kind of a
difficult or crisis period inyour life, you're more open to
what I almost in a simple way,say is the arm around your
shoulder saying you know what,don't worry about it, I'll take
(15:02):
care of it, I can explain it toyou and don't worry.
And I think so.
When people are going throughvery difficult times, the belief
that there's something orsomeone out there that can help
them or make sense of whatthey're going through and help
them to resolve it, I think canbe quite appealing.
But when you're not goingthrough that kind of difficult
period from the outside, youkind of scratch your head and
(15:25):
say you know what's going onhere.
Takara Small (15:27):
You mentioned that people can perhaps fall for
misinformation during vulnerabletimes in their lives or when
they're experiencing challenges,and I'm curious is there any
relationship to certaindemographics or ages that make
people that much more vulnerableas well?
Michael Kropveld (15:45):
Well, I think if you're kind of an adolescent
and you're going, let's say, 18to 26 year or even younger age
group, you're going through aprocess often of developing your
own identity and you know kindof contesting established kind
of beliefs and structures,whether it be your family,
society etc.
So therefore you're more openand more willing to make a
(16:08):
change and look at thingsdifferently.
And, as I said, you know, Ithink it basically from our
experience here is we've dealtwith people from right across
the spectrum and it's usuallybecause there's some kind of
issue going on.
It could be more of a part ofthe background or it can be just
at one point there's somethingthat happens which has kind of
(16:30):
caused a kind of a criticalsituation where they tend to be
much more open to it.
There's, I think, the desire tobelieve that certain people are
immune from, you know, problemsor difficulties in life,
whatever it may be.
I think is a necessary defense,because if you thought
everything that happened aroundyou would affect you, you
(16:50):
probably wouldn't walk out thedoor.
So I think there's a need todefend, so that you look at
situations like what we'rediscussing today and say, well,
this won't happen to me becauseI'm too bright, I'm educated, I
wouldn't fall for it.
I think the reality is youdon't know, and I think the kind
of studies and examples thatwe've had through our experience
(17:11):
demonstrates that it can happento anyone.
Anyone can be potentiallyvulnerable that it can happen to
anyone.
Anyone can potentiallyvulnerable.
Certain people, because ofcertain factors in their lives,
can make maybe we can say aremore susceptible or more open.
But generally I think is thereality is it can affect anyone.
Takara Small (17:30):
I do get a sense sometimes.
You know, when I'm interviewingpeople, when I'm reading up on
this subject matter, thatthere's a sense of belonging
associated with it and I'mwondering is there a desire for
community at the heart of this?
Michael Kropveld (17:44):
A big part, definitely.
When I broke it down verysimply, the need to believe and
the need to belong are verystrong components and I think in
pretty much everyone to be partof a group to have a kind of a
solid base of understandingwhat's happening around this in
the world.
So, yeah, I think that's veryimportant and going through
(18:04):
difficult times there'ssometimes is often more need to
kind of feeling that you belongto something, there is a support
system or people who see thingsthe same way as you.
Yeah, but those are very strong, I think, emotional components,
that needs that people have.
It's very hard, I mean, likeanything, you can't generalize
and apply it to everyone, butI'd say in a large percentage of
(18:28):
the population, the need tobelieve and belong are very
strong emotional pulls that drawyou into situations sometimes
that are not always, let's say,beneficial for you the hole
that's been left by religion incanada and you can argue overall
society.
Takara Small (18:47):
Has that had an effect at all?
Has that had an impact?
Michael Kropveld (18:51):
it has an impact to the degree that you
know.
Uh, there's a lot.
Let's say there's a period.
Let's say there's a periodwhere, let's say, I'm in Quebec
where the Catholic Church playsa very strong role in social,
political and religious spheresof people's lives, and the
dramatic change away from thatobviously led to kind of a
vacuum.
(19:11):
At the same time as a vacuumoccurs, it doesn't necessarily
mean it's getting filled bynecessarily negative kind of
movements or negativeorganizations.
But I think the reality is, whenpeople turn their back on
something and have a distrust orlack of faith in what they grew
up with or what they believedin, they become more open to
(19:32):
looking around them to see whatelse is there.
And unfortunately there arealso movements that will
capitalize on that need.
So it is a certain reality,definitely, that the lack or the
change in belief leads peopleto become more open to new
adventures, new spiritualexperiences, but not necessarily
(19:54):
just religious.
A lot of people have foundthat's a you know kind of home,
one would say, in differentother kinds of communal
organizations and groups, thatis spring up and one of the
things that you know we'll getto is the fact that people also
belonging, almost want to say tomovements that exist only
(20:14):
online and are not gettingtogether in person with people
that they used to, which is alsoa dramatic change from
basically where we started, wheneverything was face-to-face
kind of, and people werecommunally living together or
spending time together indifferent environments in
(20:36):
different environments.
Takara Small (20:38):
You mentioned how religion can sometimes create
fissions or fractures whichforce people to look for you
know, other support or othercommunities, particularly in
Canada, with a decrease inreligion playing a major role.
I'm curious Can you seesomething similar happening when
there's recessions or financial, global financial setbacks?
(20:58):
I mean, do you see that samefaith shaken to the core and
people seeking out some otherresource or faith?
Michael Kropveld (21:07):
Well, a lot of this is obviously tied to, you
know, what's going on in society.
In society I mean the rise ofdifferent kinds of movements.
You know, whether they be kindof positive or problematic.
You know, usually come at timeswhen there is a kind of social
upheaval, different stressfulsituations.
Obviously, I think there'shardly anybody that would say
that we are not going through avery kind of stressful, complex
(21:30):
and difficult times.
You know, over the last numberof years, you know previous even
to COVID, but since, and theincreased polarization that is
occurring in different societiesas well, all play a factor,
makes it more difficult forpeople to kind of feel, kind of
feel excuse me people that feelmore grounded and feel more
(21:53):
anchored to the society and feelmore comfortable with
themselves.
So there is that kind of liketendency at times like that to
look for a solution.
You know why am I having such ahard time?
why, you know, like financially,is it so difficult for me?
I need somebody to explain it,and what people tend to at that
those times look for is notcomplexity.
(22:14):
They don't want complexity.
You're looking for somebody totell them what's right, what's
wrong, how is it, how am I gonnaget you out of this mess?
Or by joining this group orgetting involved in this,
everything will work out.
It's kind of like the the needto believe in kind of almost a
miracle solution to difficulttimes and problems.
I mean, I mentioned this and itkind of an example comes to mind
(22:37):
.
It was somebody who I know yearsago who was a very skeptical
kind of person about all kind oflike different kind of faith,
healings et cetera and miraclecures.
But he ended up having heartproblems and the doctors were
telling me he would requireheart surgery and he told me at
that time he ended up going to asession being offered here
(22:59):
somewhere in Montreal aboutsomebody who could deal with
health problems without surgeryand he told me about this
experience and he said you knowwhat?
That was the first time I couldreally really personally relate
to the kind of work you'redoing, mike, because it was
appealing to want to believethat I could actually do
something like that and behealed.
(23:19):
Anyway, he ended up doing asurgery and he's okay, but I
think it kind of symbolized forme that kind of reality is like
when you're going through thatkind of difficult time,
sometimes you want to believethat there's something out there
that will offer you that kindof magical solution or a simple
formula or recipe that will takecare of what you're going
(23:40):
through.
Takara Small (23:42):
So there's something called the illusionary
truth effect and how that canmake certain ideas seem more
credible than they are.
Can you explain that to me?
Michael Kropveld (23:52):
Well, part of it, I think, with that is like
it's kind of repeated exposureto the same in quotation mark
lie or story.
You just hear it often enough.
Sometimes you end up doubtingyourself.
You know, especially if you'resurrounded by people who kind of
believe the same thing, you'reless likely over time to maybe
(24:14):
question or doubt it and say,well, maybe I'm wrong, maybe
these people are all right,since you're kind of being
bombarded constantly with thesame message.
And so that's where it becomesvery difficult, you know, for
people to step outside and sayyou know what, make a
concentrated effort to seek outother points of view and other
kind of positions, which doesn'toften happen.
(24:36):
That's like what happens thesedays is most people.
What they do is they end upgoing on the internet, and once
you go on the internet and youstart Googling a certain kind of
question or concern, you end upgoing down what people have
described as that rabbit hole ofconstantly finding things that
confirm or reinforce what youalready kind of believe or what
(24:56):
others around you are alreadybeen saying is the truth, which
you know, as your questionarises, how people end up buying
into the lie.
Takara Small (25:05):
One of the common aspects I'm seeing is the role
of emotion in all of this, andso what you know does fear,
anger, happiness.
How does that impact a person'sability to evaluate the
accuracy of what they're seeing,what they're believing?
Michael Kropveld (25:31):
And so when you kind of get emotionally
involved, as I mentioned, I likekind of using examples,
sometimes it kind of reminds me,like you know, if I'm talking
to you and I'm your best friend,and you tell me you fell in
love with John and I go, john,the guy is just out to get your
money.
He's a no good kind of guy andI expect you to say, oh me, mike
(25:52):
, you're right, I'm leaving himtomorrow and I'll go look for
another boyfriend Never going tohappen tomorrow and I'll go
look for another boyfriend nevergonna happen.
Because people kind of getinvolved, because it responds on
an emotional level.
You know, most people from theoutside look at and say, well,
this is not logical, thisdoesn't make any sense.
But emotionally it appeals topeople and it's kind of almost
you kind of love becomes blind.
And so you fall into this andyou get involved emotionally and
(26:16):
obviously in some movementswhere there's this kind of split
between we're the good guys andeverybody on the outside is bad
and evil and basically out toget you.
That creates the sense ofsometimes the fear of the other
and the fear of those outsidewho have a different perspective
or point of view.
So when you come to a degreeyou you know of coming to
believe, like the example of thelove relationship.
(26:39):
You know you're going to defendwhat you're doing and also be
very reluctant, and you know tocontain or to maintain or
continue, necessarily, arelationship with other people.
At the same time, when you getinto certain situations or
environments, you know, you cometo believe that you have found
the truth, example being duringthe COVID, you had a lot of
(27:01):
people, not just during COVIDbut also today, who bought into
different theories and ideas butended up feeling that they
found the truth.
Everyone on the outside waseither brainwashed or bought
into the system and followedmedia etc.
But they had found the truth andso there's a sense of for sure,
a lot of power and also, as onewould say, to a certain degree,
(27:24):
a certain happiness of havingdiscovered something unique and
other people were not aware of.
So gave them a certain sense ofpower and in certain movements
and belief systems.
I think it's important torecognize that that sense of
power, for people who don'tnecessarily feel they have much
power in their everyday lives,is something which is very
strong and is something thatmotivates them to continue and
(27:48):
also can generate a lot of angeragainst those who necessarily
oppose.
Because the general reactionyou know know, when people get
involved in certain systems ormovements which others don't
like is they will reactlogically or factually or kind
of confront the individual,which also generates anger in
the individual at the same time,which will also lead to often a
(28:12):
breakdown in communicationswith people who are close around
them.
Some systems you know that dealwith, especially during the
COVID period, pretty simplyencourage people just to cut off
contact with all people who didnot believe or think like them.
Takara Small (28:28):
I want to ask if there's anything we as a society
can do to counteract this.
Is there some type ofinoculation?
Michael Kropveld (28:36):
People always like to say well, education,
preventive education I mean,nobody's against education.
The question then comes is whatkind of education, to who's
carrying it out and what's yourultimate goal in doing it?
I definitely agree that one ofthe things that we should be
teaching more of is criticalthinking and giving people
(28:57):
access to how to figure out, howto assess information from
various sources, to questions toask.
Those are always things that Iwould agree with.
But fundamentally, the questionif you have problems that exist
in a society, where are theycoming from?
If the problem is that peoplefeel disaffected or disconnected
from mainline structures andsocieties that exist and that
(29:18):
could be political, religious,you know, mental health, medical
, etc.
Then the question is how do youreturn?
You know that kind of how doyou rebuild confidence for
people in the society they livein?
Not easy questions.
I don't have an easy answer howto do that, but I think it's
part of is recognizing that ifpeople don't trust, for example,
(29:38):
you're more comfortable withhearing.
You know this person is goingto give you what you want, even
(30:01):
though maybe it's never going tohappen.
So but ultimately I say, how doyou get to the root kind of
causes you know that's a muchmore difficult process, you know
.
I mean education is helpful.
How do you provide serviceswhen I think people are running
into difficulties and problem?
Yes, these are all questions Ithink most people might agree
(30:24):
with, but at the same time, isthis question is going to be
who's going to pay for it andwho's going to do it?
And when it comes down toquestions of who's going to pay,
there seems to very, verylittle money around to really
kind of deal with this, becausesome of it as mentioning when
you're looking at societalissues are not something that
gets resolved bang, bang, bang.
(30:45):
You know, and you know how longis going to take to get people's
confidence back in structuresand societies that we've built
up over.
You know, decades andgenerations?
I don't know.
I decades and generations?
I don't know.
I don't think it's an easy task.
It's not necessarily a task weshouldn't undertake, but I think
it's something that has to beseen as difficult but necessary.
Takara Small (31:11):
Is there anything in your opinion the government
can do better on this subject?
Michael Kropveld (31:17):
Is there anything in your opinion the
government can do better on thissubject?
Well, government, my experienceis because one person we talked
to in government said what canwe do around this issue?
Governments can do.
What they can do is they canmake laws.
I mean, I'm always hesitantwhen it comes to questions of
making laws, because thequestion is how much do you
(31:38):
really know about the issue youwant to make a law about?
And then, once you have the law, is it really going to be
effective in dealing with theproblem or is it just kind of,
let's say, you know making, youknow dressing, you know giving a
nice dressing to a subject butreally doesn't have much kind of
, let's say, beef or meat behindit?
(31:59):
I think part of it, a minimum,is recognizing, I think as a
part of government, that peopleare harmed by whether you want
to call it misinformation,disinformation.
You know radicalization,extremist groups.
You know extreme religious orhigh-control movements or
organizations in our society.
There are families andindividuals that are harmed,
that need help, and part of itis at least you don't have to
(32:23):
get into a discussion, do youagree, disagree with X or Y
perspective on an issue, butrecognize and I think most
people will is that, no matterwhat the group or society, some
people are harmed in these kindof movements and groups and in
some groups and movements morepeople are harmed than in others
and what they can do is providemore services to people.
(32:44):
When that happens, it's the sametime is, of course, trying to
address you know how to dealwith this kind of an issue in a
comprehensive way, Because itmeans to me bringing together
people from different kind ofspectrums and different kind of
sectors, rather, of society andlooking at okay, what is the
(33:04):
problem here?
There's a lot of research goingon dealing with radicalization,
misinformation, disinformation.
The question is how do youdevelop a policy to effectively
deal with these kind of concerns?
And I think you start thatprocess by bringing actors from
different sectors together andseeing what you can come up with
(33:24):
.
But at the same time, like Isay, because of where we work, I
would say, at least at the theminimum, recognize people are
harmed and that more servicesshould be offered to these
people, whether it be formermembers or families going
through, you know, distress atdifficult times because of
someone they care about.
You know.
Takara Small (33:41):
I think, at the minimum, that that's what can be
done, should be done, rather ifthere are listeners who are
tuning in and they have a familymember, or maybe even a loved
one, who was bought intomisinformation to a worrying
degree, what advice would yougive them?
Michael Kropveld (33:59):
Well, without knowing individual histories,
simple kind of what to do, whatnot to do, don't get into
logical, practical or factualdiscussions.
If somebody really believeswhat they believe, all they
probably do is look at you andsay you don't understand.
You're totally conned by theother side.
(34:19):
The issue is trying to, like Imentioned a while ago, is how do
you see the world through theeyes of the individual, so that
if you have an idea of who theyare, where they're coming from,
what the needs potentially arefor them believing in this, it
may be a better approach to lookat it and approach it on an
emotional level and basically,if you're concerned, expressing
(34:43):
your concern without gettinginto factual, saying look, I'm
really concerned, I don'tunderstand, especially if
there's been a dramatic changein their personality and their
beliefs.
I don't understand the process,what's happened and how you got
involved.
Can you explain it to me?
Explaining and wanting tounderstand does not mean that
(35:03):
you buying into it.
I am understand because I careabout you.
You know, ultimately it's notimportant.
Well, excuse me, not a questionof how important.
It's not whether or not Ibelieve or don't believe what
you're saying, because it's notme that's going to be living
with your decisions.
I'm trying to understand morewhat happened and the process
that you've gone through, and soyou want, you want to.
(35:26):
You know, what I'm saying hereis you want to keep it more on
an emotional level and reconnect.
We feel and obviously everyperson has to make their own
decision is maintainingcommunication and trying to
improve.
It is very important Becausewithout any contact or
communication, you have no ideawhat's going on with the person.
I say it's up to eachindividual or family member to
(35:51):
decide because you know anyadvice you get and people often,
when they call us, have gottenall kinds of different advice
from different people wementioned.
Look, whatever decision youmake in terms of how you want to
proceed, recognize that thosewho give you advice, the same
way as the person you care about, who's getting advice or
suggestions from others thoughthey're not the ones are going
(36:12):
to be living with your decision.
So if you want to do something,you have to look at the approach
you're taking.
Does it make sense and can youput it into practice?
And some people you know don'twant to do this.
Yeah, I mean, it's ourapproaches.
I think trying to understandnot necessarily, it's not a
question approach is, I thinktrying to understand not
necessarily it's not a question,do you agree or disagree?
(36:32):
But trying to understand whatsomeone's going through and then
looking at, how do you maintainthat communication and contact
with the individual andhopefully, you know, raising
questions which may elicit, youknow it's kind of a reflection
on their part.
I think you also want torecognize that you know better
(36:53):
off from a strategy point ofview is like what are you hoping
to achieve?
Is it feasible?
And if it's feasible, what arethe pros and cons of the
approaches you're going to take?
And look more closely at thecons of what you're planning,
because if things work out theway you want, you're always
happy.
If they don't, can you livewith the cons of what you're
planning?
Because if things work out theway you want, you're always
happy.
If they don't, can you livewith the consequences of having
(37:13):
something happen?
You know, and you know that'swhy you look at it from that
perspective.
But part of it is alsorecognizing that people are
different, so what brought theminto a situation can vary from
individual to individual.
There may be a background I needto believe you know.
So these are a lot of factors,but ultimately it's not
(37:34):
confronting the individual,because that pretty much doesn't
work and often will reinforcetheir conviction and belief,
because if I believe that I havethe right information and
you're the ones with the falseinformation, well you know I may
cut off from you.
So that's what you want to kindof avoid.
But, as I said, you have tofeel comfortable with that
(37:57):
approach and obviously eachfamily you know is different.
There's a lot of other factorsthat I deal with when I get into
situations with families, butusually don't attack the
individual, don't attack ifthey're involved in a group.
Don't attack the group.
If there's a leader, do notattack the leader of the group
(38:17):
either.
These are generally situationswhich will indirectly reinforce
their belief and faith andpossibly decrease the kind of
contact and create walls betweenyou and the person, walls which
make it different tocommunicate and keep in touch.
Takara Small (38:35):
And that was Mike Kropfeld, the executive director
of InfoCult or InfoSect, and ifyou want to visit their website
for resources, the link will bein the podcast description Next
week on episode four.
We want to help you guardagainst falling for any
misinformation yourself.
Timothy Caulfield (38:52):
If we're using AI tools to get
information, it's reallyimportant to understand what
they're good at and what they'rebad at.
Takara Small (39:01):
We'll be providing you with loads of great advice
to identify misinformation anddo your own fact checking.
Keep an eye out for that and ifyou want to reach out, you can
email us at podcast at xeroca.
You can also find me at TakaraSmall on Blue Sky Social and
Instagram.
Thank you for listening andwe'll see you next week.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.