Welcome to GNED 1202-007!
This blog is where you will watch conspiracy-related documentaries each week and post your comments in the space provided.
As part of the introductory week, I would like you to watch a CBC documentary called "Conspiracy Rising":
http://www.cbc.ca/doczone/episode/conspiracy-rising-1.html
Discuss some of the ways "conspiracy theorists" are depicted in this film.
I think that “Conspiracy Rising” is a documentary that allows us to see various versions of what “conspiracy theorists” look like. The way I envisioned these differing versions of conspiracy theorists was to look at it like a continuum.
ReplyDeleteAt one end of the spectrum we have the stereotypical discredited conspiracy theorist: Alex Jones. (The biggest problem I have with this documentary is not this man - But the way this man is portrayed. First if we take into consideration how much less video time this man has compared to other shown theorists, and that what is shown is particularly negative it’s hard not to be tricked into thinking that this man is your stereotypical conspiracy quack.) This man is portrayed as irrational – “No one is safe; Do you understand that? Pure evil is running everywhere at high level!” It is hard to respect the reasoning behind that statement because it isn’t very reasonable. However after some quick research I have come to the conclusion that this man isn’t very credible (not because of his portrayal in this video) because he makes rather grandeur or vague statements without any precise or concisely articulated research to back up those statements.
And at the other we have a conspiracy theorist challenging “fact/history” with science and evidence that the history just doesn’t add up to fact we have: Michael Shermer. This man in the documentary is portrayed as the “good” conspiracy theorist, because even though he is still challenging the official report of recorded events he is doing so in a polite, scientific matter, and with evidence that can be respected.
And then we have the middle part of the spectrum - here lies the everyday people struggling to make sense of difficult tragic events. People like you and me. People who have low income, people who feel a disconnect between themselves and modern politics, people who feel like the government isn’t helping them. People like Bob Mcilvaine who lost his son to an indescribably horrific tragedy.
This documentary examines the purpose of conspiracy theories for those who don’t believe and to those who do. Whether there is validity of the psychological perspective in which theorists used conspiracies to cope with a magnitude of tragedies is yet to be seen, but what is seen in this video is a variety of ways to see what a conspiracy theorist looks like. And that there are many ways to believe.
Response to the CBC Documentary Conspiracy Rising
ReplyDeleteConspiracy theorists in this context are depicted as having both valid and questionable justifications to their arguments. An individual’s perception plays a vital role in whether they choose to acknowledge these conspiracy theories or rather dismiss them.
The issue with the belief of these theorists is that conspiracy theory is “known to ignore evidence”. However, this documentary goes on to say that “history has shown that government leaders conspire”. In a sense this appears to be contradicting and misleading which in turn, questions the reliability of the theories. On the other hand,
this could lead up to the conclusion that conspiracy theories are indeed valid and there is that possibility that the government is only looking out for their best interests and not their citizens.
It is interesting to note that “1/3 of Americans” believe their government has withheld information from them regarding who is accountable for the 9/11 plot. This brings up the question as to whether or not this demographic all believe that 9/11 was nothing but a conspiracy?
If an individual is experiencing uncertainty towards believing the official story, they are more likely to be more accepting of conspiracy alternatives.
Some of the viewpoints appeared to be a bit extreme but there were also some conspiracies that seemed to be somewhat reasonable.
Ultimately, each individual is going to believe what they perceive to be the “correct version of the story”. Whether or not an individual takes into consideration what conspiracy theories are arguing, may be reflected by their own stance.
The theorists all brought up interesting insight on how the events might have occurred and it is up to the documentary viewer to see if the viewpoints expressed are a reflection of their own beliefs.
Conspiracy Rising was an interesting look into recent conspiracy theories over the 20th and 21st century, as well as some of the reasoning and thought processes of a conspiracy theorist.
ReplyDeleteNowadays with the advent of the internet, we are able to control information flow more easily, and go and research things for ourselves, as opposed to only being informed through mainstream media such as TV or the newspaper. More than ever, we are able to find out more about an event, and potentially a conspiracy theory about said event, and decide for ourselves what we believe.
Along with this phenomena though, conspiracy theorists have also taken advantage of the internet and created websites and documentaries and through them have been able to megaphone their ideas and theories much easier, sometimes in ways that may make a decision for us before we are able to decide for ourselves. Alex Jones is depicted in the film as a more radical mindset of this type, often yelling and extremely passionate about what he believes. He also operates a prominent website featuring many conspiracy theories, and also creates and sells films detailing them, which in turn may create people who visit his site or watch them to readily believe them much easier, as long as they already agree with it, as an expert in the film notes. I'm not discrediting Alex by any means, just pointing that out.
I thought it was really curious how the film also shows how we as humans are programmed to be conspirators, be it parents reading the diary of their child and "conspiring" what to do about it, or even the children themselves deciding how they will play the parents into something. Also, it is said that humans are wired to generally believe what they are told, and that our brains will generally want to trust our fellow man. Conspiracy theories are often a pattern, and our brains work to find patterns in something and when it figures out the pattern, we are rewarded with a dopamine hit. I found this very interesting a chemical balancing in our system can make us want to seek out "the truth" in something.
We also see people who strongly believe they are on the right side of a conspiracy seeing themselves as a force of virtue and anyone against them or who questions them must be the enemy. As a conspiracy expert in the film says, this type of thought process could affect democracy, as anyone including local politicians are seen as conspirators with the enemy and untrustworthy.
One of the reasons we believe and create conspiracy theories is that they occur in real life. Some that we now know about have even been on as large a scale as government wide. Look at the case of the WMDs in Iraq that were never found, but were the pretense for the whole Iraq War in the first place, or so we were told. Or better yet, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which we now know never occurred, but was the entire reason the US entered the Vietnam War. Here we have two examples where entire wars were started based on a lie or misdirection, or a conspiracy created by a much higher power than the average person. Such examples of a larger conspiracy that have later been proven as fact are a prime example of why conspiracy theories still continue and will arguably always exist.
"Conspiracy Rising" is a documentary which focuses on many of the various conspiracy theories present in today's media. It focuses largely on the idea that people constantly do conspire with one another, and governments have been known to do this in the past. It balances this idea out however with the premise that because of the rise of the internet's anonymity and convenience, many conclusions reached have to be carefully analyzed before being accepted as truth. In an age where information is far more easily accessed than ever, it can be easily agreed upon that critical thinking is one of the most important skills present in today's ever changing society. To be able to look at these events and analyze them critically before simply accepting them as a conspiracy or "truth" will be a very valuable skill now, and even as the world moves forward.
ReplyDeleteThere are many theories seen throughout the documentary that seem outlandish and demonstrate this need for critical thinking before acceptance, such as "the rule of the lizard people". However this does not mean that all conspiracies are completely irrational and devoid of any actions 'behind the curtain' as one would say. A good example would be the JFK assassination, as it seems rather possible that some larger force was responsible for the events that transpired that day. We cannot assume that the government is always behind some dastardly plot, but we cannot allow these possibilities to fly past us without consideration either.
The documentary also looks at the theorists themselves, and how they come to reach their conclusions. It depicts how basically anybody can say what they want on the internet, and without critical thinking we may be psychologically or emotionally biased towards such theories, if we do not have access to clear answers. This again does not mean that every conspiracy theory is false, as some theories have been critiqued and analyzed in depth for their accuracy and rational explanations.
Many statistics and interesting facts are presented throughout the program, such as the type of people who are most likely to believe and create these theories, or the amount of people that truly believe these theories instead of the presented official answer. As growing students thrust into this world of uncertain answers we have to be able to decipher the truth given to us from evidence and rational thinking, not from emotional thrills. It is because of these thrills that conspiracies will never disappear, as it is from human nature that we wish to uncover something hidden and feel rewarded. However we cannot let this drive our stances and opinions, as the true answer can never be concluded from irrationality.
The documentary “conspiracy rising” is about two perspectives of any large event in history, as talked about near the beginning, what they say happened, and what really happened. People who believe differently than what is known to have happened are known as conspiracy theorists.
ReplyDeleteThere are few conspiracy theorists depicted in this documentary and those who are, are given very limited time to talk and descriptions of why they believe what they do. Rather, people who talk about why people tend to rely on creating or believing conspiracy’s. To name a few, Bob McKelvien, when his son died in the 9/11 attacks he set out for the truth of what actually happened. He has a hard time believing the US had nothing to do with these terrorist attacks. Another being Alex Jones, a very irrational conspiracy theorist with a large group of followers threw his radio show with the belief that the US had an “inside job” on the 9/11 attacks. Among other things, including what really happened in the assassination of JFK. Mohammed, father of Princess Diana’s boyfriend, believes that Prince Charles among other royalty set out to kill Princess Diana. He believes the drunk driver accident was really no accident at all.
In many ways these thinkers are put aside in this documentary in the reasoning of why there are conspiracy theorists. In reasoning, researchers have found that people of ethnic minority, those who feel disconnected from politics that is mainstream, along with low income earners are more likely to be conspiracy theorists. Patrick Leman explains, the more extravagant and detailed event the more likely people will proceed with a conspiracy to explain all the reasoning behind the event. It can sometimes even be hard for people to believe there is no reasoning or logic and just to let it be, resulting in skeptics. David Livingstone Smith believes that conspiracies are based on human behaviours. This is caused by the events of everyday life, including even what you see today on popular TV shows. Even this is based on conceptions, making people more likely to believe conspiracies in real life.
In this documentary, the conspiracy theorists are analyzed for the physiological reasoning behind why they and close followers believe something other than what is factually proven. They are depicted in a way that makes you question why these people are analyzing every event themselves for answers deeper than what is given to them. It also leads the watcher to believe that those who don’t trust the government may be paranoid and are simply incapable of trust. The video explains at the end not to believe everything we hear and to start off as skeptics, but we must also be rational.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteConspiracy Rising was an enlightening documentary portraying the importance of the mass media upon the views of the individual in society. In keeping with Marshall McLuhan's, "the medium is the message," the documentary exposes how contagious socially accepted theories about tragic events in our social world are formed, distributed, and subsequently in need of refute. The importance of the us vs. them ideology is ever present in why humans are compelled to not believe everything the media tells them.
ReplyDeleteConspiracy theorists are depicted as being driven by an overwhelming desire for correctness and dominance in all areas including our knowledge of world events. The uprising force of negativity and our lack of belief spreads quicker than altruistic faith and trust in the system to which we are all subject. Historically, the most tragic events naturally inspire public analysis beyond what is immediately presented because of the possibility of uncovering new knowledge and a semblance of control of our own lives. I believe it is vital to remain skeptical of any conspiracy theory, government explanation, or paid mediums so called 'truths' because of their vastly differing motivations.
"Conspiracy Rising" seems to be a relatively fair documentary, it offers multiple opinions and many different sides to the argument. Although, to be fair, it is released by a media outlet, something that would be very pleased to make conspiracy theorists looks silly.
ReplyDeleteThe first believer we get a good look at is Mr. Bob McIlvaine, an elderly man that is attempting to uncover the truth behind his sons death on 9/11. Bob is astounding to the skeptical viewer, simply because of how "normal" he looks. He doesn't appear crazy, he doesn't seem weird, he looks like anyone's grandfather, and hes extremely relatable because he's simply trying to make sense of all his grief. Bob speaks his part, and we the film transitions on.
Next we meet someone on the other end of the conspiracy spectrum, Alex Jones, a well-known radio host and conspiracy theorist. Where McIlvaine was a sweet old man, Jones is loud, in-your-face, and doesn't care who knows it. He rings of Bill O'Reilly, with the same yell-until-you're-right method of promoting your opinion.
These sorts of theorists are presented throughout the program, but as the film continues the beliefs got more outlandish, the believers themselves crazier, until we arrive at aliens and lizard people. Throughout this all, the believers are juxtaposed with scientists and experts that are skeptical of those whom believe in conspiracy. There is a stark contrast between the believers, whom cry out their opinions while holding on to faith, and the experts who back up their opinions and statements with all of the facts they've determined to be true.
Near the end of this documentary, it is clear the message the director is attempting to send, that those who believe are simply by-products of this soceity, of media, and of a world filled with people who are scared.
Conspiracy theorists are represented as people that are compelled to find out the truth, alternative explanations for world events. They believe that anyone can be an expert and post an opinion because of repetition of information. That the things you believe have to do with who you are and status. With the believers of the conspiracies normally ignore evidence showing the truth.
ReplyDeleteThe video talks about some of the popular conspiracy theories the public likes to talk about. They shared information on the JFK assassination,
Princess Diana’s Death, 9/11, the new world order and UFO’s and Area 51.
Discussing the conspiracies around these topics gave me the idea that they
are stories told to them, from a friend of a friend of a friend.
In the JFK assassination segment, they looked at all the evidence from
that day and came up with pictures showing where the shots came from and
where Lee Harvey Oswell was when he took the fatal shot, soon after he was
referred to as the lone gunman. Finding the truth about that day is
impossible due to the death of Lee Harvey Oswell at the hands of a club
owner named Jack Ruby. The video talked about if you asked people that
were around when the event occurred they could remember the exact moment and what they were doing at the time of the event; they called it flash
bulb memories. These days’ people still visit the site of the assassination
but no one knows how many shooters there were that day, which raises
questions about if Lee Harvey Oswell played alone in the crime or were
there others? With all the mystery of that day the public believe that
they were lied to and it was the dividing moment between the public and
the government.
With the UFO/Area 51 conspiracy people question the government because of
how they handled the situation. Some news reporters placed the story in
the newspapers and the public began to ask questions, then with the
government pulling the story, this led the public to believe that
something did happen and they were not going to tell the world. Videos and
pictures were displayed for the public to see what the government was
hiding, which was almost like putting gas on a fire and the government was
in the center. With the release of the video, people started to make their
own conclusions about what happened and what came to earth if something
really did visit earth. If the government is not hiding anything then why
do they have such heavy security around area 51?
In the documentary “Conspiracy Rising” I found that from the beginning the film depicted conspiracy theories as stupid and irrelevant. From the point of view of this documentary it’s clearly shown that conspiracies are not based on any facts. The conspiracy theorists play on people’s doubts and suspicions that the government is hiding stuff from them. The documentary depicts the official story as absolute fact backed truth. However the official story is often just as flimsy as the conspiracy version there is just more power and authority behind the official story.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that so many people believe in these conspiracies is intriguing because it demonstrates how we just rely on what were told with out proving it is in fact correct. Neither side has any real factual evidence. The government simply wants to control the situation for evolving to something bigger than it needs to be. Whereas the conspiracy theorist seem to just be looking to challenge the authority of the government.
"Conspiracy Rising" reveals the two sides, and two types of people that exist when it comes to certain events and beliefs in the past and present. The first type are the people who believe the real story that is put out for people to believe by the government. These people believe things such as the fact that President Kennedy was actually shot by a lone gunman, or that 9/11 was a terrorist attack with nothing bigger behind it. The other type of people are known as 'conspiracy theorists' or 'truthers.' They are the ones who don't believe what they are told by the government and have a whole other explanation to what happened and why it happened.
ReplyDeleteAt one point in the documentary, it is said that if someone is directly affected by an event or was present at the time it happened, there is a higher chance of them to become conspiracy theorists. Bob Mckelvein is an example of someone like this. His son was killed in one of the towers during 9/11, and he definitely does not believe the story that is put out about 9/11. He is set out to find out the truth because he was affected in such a big way. Alex Jones is another man who does not believe the standard 9/11 story. He is not supportive of the Islamic Terrorist attack and strongly believe that the US government played an important role in the event.
There are many conspiracy theory critics out there, such as James Meigs who shares his opinion in the documentary. He says that "truthers call themselves skeptical, yet they are the least skeptical people you will meet." They believe anything they read as long as they already agree with it. A critic about conspiracy theorists is that they can never prove what they believe. They put all their time and energy into one debate, and ignore all the other evidence that exists which contradicts their belief.
David Livingston Smith believes that conspiracies are real, and they exist in all areas of social life. The example he gave was of kids conspiring against their parents at a very young age to get what they want. Conspiracies are part of everyday human nature, and to understand them it is very important to know how humans behave.
The JFK Assassination was looked at from a different angle. Moments like November 22, 1963 are moments where conspiracy theories are born. Gary Mack said that this was a moment when people lost faith in their government because they found out that the public was being lied to. Looking at the death of Princess Diana, 1/3 of British people believe that the death was no accident due to a drunk driver. There are many stories out there, such as one of Diana's boyfriends father, Mohammad who believes that the royal family was behind her death.
There is a belief that the bigger the event, the more chance there is of it turning into a conspiracy theory. Humans are wired to point out informations in their brains that supports their existing belief, meaning it is not necessarily true. At the end of the day, conspiracy theories do exist, whether it is a turning point in history, or in everyday life but nothing should be believed until it is proven true.
The documentary allows the audience to reflect on the major conspiracy theories in recent history. The video portrays conspiracy theorists as skeptical people who are not easily manipulated. It also portrays theorists as people who do not think with reason. At the times the video argues that conspiracy theorists are simply making up theories in order to satisfy their mind. I thought the video aims at making the audience think in a more logical manner.
ReplyDeleteConspiracy theories generally have no real proof. I find it hard to believe that so many people by into an idea with such little evidence. It seems that everybody wants to find a reason to rebel. People are consumed with the idea of conspiracy theories. Once they are consumed, there is no turning back. The documentary promotes logical thinking. Bush claimed that Iraq had chemical weapons of mass destruction. Bush however, had no proof that Iraq had these weapons. He simply told the world that Iraq was hiding these weapons and that it was a good idea for America to attack Iraq. Somehow he managed to convince millions. In the end we found no real proof of any chemical weapons. This idea is not rational at all. No proof was ever presented.
In many cases conspiracy theorists were represented as skeptics who rebelled against world order. They were represented as people who were not easily manipulated. This can be portrayed in a positive light. it is necessary to be skeptical in our modern world. Throughout the entire video there were always two sides to each argument. A man in the video encouraged people to question the validity of an idea until it is proven correct. This seems like wise advice to me.
I
After viewing the video "Conspiracy Rising" a couple of times I am still unsure if this was a fair depiction of "Conspiracy Theorists". On one hand it seems that CBC did try to interview people from a wide range of events all with varying views on the people surrounding these said events, but on the other side it feels as if the video is still trying to depict the theorists in a negative light.
ReplyDeleteYou have men like David Livingstone Smith who seems to take more of a neutral stance on the theorists themselves. He seems to attribute their behaviours as just regular human responses that are triggered by emotional events. He justifies all people and their reactions as just trying to find ways to cope with horrible life altering events, but he also states that we must challenge things and think for ourselves.
Then you have men like Michael Shermer who seems to depict conspiracy theorists, or even people in general, as simple minded, incompetent creatures. He tries to say that we as people need the cause of an event to be in correlation with the effect of the event and that sometimes this does not happen. I agree with that, but the manner in which he engages the audience makes me feel as if he thinks he is superior to people and that conspiracy theorists are very low beings.
People like Michael Robinson, Patrick Leman and John Macnamara seem to want to paint all people in a good light. They tend to say that people grieve and when they do they will naturally want to blame someone for tragedy. It is human nature for us to want to blame someone for death, sometimes accidents do happen though.
Perhaps, for myself at least, the worst person in the whole documentary, in the sense of portraying "conspiracy theorists" in a poor manner, was the narrator. Ann-Marie MacDonald seemed to have the worst take on the people in this video, her words felt demeaning and very biased.
All in all the documentary does cover a range of views on "conspiracy theorists" but the overall feel is that they are lesser people who cannot think for themselves or on a higher level.
The documentary "Conspiracy Rising" goes over some of the major events that have been the sources of many conspiracy theories. It also covers some of the conspiracy theorists that have created or simply believe in some the theories that are out there.
ReplyDeleteIn the documentary they seem to make conspiracy theorists look like they are paranoid and in some cases completely irrational and crazy. It describes them to normally be those are disconnected from politics or have a low income. One of the speakers that was interviewed described them as people that reject what they were told about an event and create their own explaination for what happened while ignoring all of the outstanding evidence and making up something that just couldn't have happened.
Some people become conspiracy theorists as a way of trying to deal with traumatic experiences resulting from some of the events that have occurred in the world. An example of this happening was Bob who was featured in a part of the documentary. His son was killed in the events of 9/11 and he wants to know exactly what happened. He was made out to be a man who simply wanted answers as he didn't believe that the planes could of taken down the towers s they supposedly did. At the same time he is made out to be a rational person who does not ignore the evidence that was released in the media but just feels like there was something more at play to cause the towers to collapse as they did.
Another speaker states that we all conspire at some point as it can be something as simple as children trying to manipulate their parents. He said that we are all rational to be skeptical of we are told and that conspiracy theories aren't someting irrational. In the end the documentary shows that theorists can definately be over the top with their claims and be completely irrational but at the same time, others can be completely rational with their theories.
In this documentary, we are able to see how conspiracies and controversies regarding major historical events arise from individuals and groups that share differing views on the "truth" of how these events actually occurred. We live in an era where society is exposed to a vast range of information and ideas with and even wider ranger of differing perspectives. We rely on sources that are deemed credible to provide us with information that is supposed to be unbiased and disclose as much information as possible to the public. One of the problems that we as a society have seen is that personal opinions and views are becoming mixed in with these major outlets of information, which has only resulted in further controversy over which sources are telling the truth and can be deemed trustworthy.
ReplyDeleteGoing beyond the media, conspiracies are further fueled by the government. This is perhaps one of the most controversial topics regarding conspiracies, as the government must choose how much and what types of information should be released to the public and which information should be kept within government hands. Take for example the killing of Osama Bin Laden. Information leaked that there was a photo that confirmed the death of Bin Laden and the government was forced with the decision on whether or not to release that photo. Ultimately they chose not to release the photo in order to, so called, protect the public. As human beings we require evidence and patterns to prove or disprove theories, events etc. Evidence is ultimately the basis of the majority of the world's legal systems, and when certain evidence is witheld by the government, it becomes difficult for the public to wrap their head around an idea when there is no clear proof to support its claim. So with the that said, how can one be one hundred percent certain that Bin Laden was killed, when we have no evidence to support the statements made by the US government. We are forced to trust the word of government officials, who in many cases have deceived the public before.
In regards to this particular documentary, I did find a fairly large bias involved. The majority of the documentary focused only on one side of recent major historical events. Most of those interviewed provided the conspiracy perspective on the events and an equal perspective of from the opposing side was not shown, which would have better allowed the viewer to interpret the date and make an informed decision. The documentary in itself shows how powerful media can be and how easy it can be to manipulate public opinion on major issues, and subsequently create controversy and conspiracy theories.
Conspiracy theorists portrayed in this documentary are considered to be the exact opposite from that of a skeptic.
ReplyDeleteBob McLlavaine came up with the theory that explosives destroyed the world trade center towers during the 9/11 attacks. He started to believe this because his son Bobby died in one of these buildings during the time. This goes to show that traumatic events can fuel an individual to believe in something else rather than the truth. A belief in such a thing could be a way of mourning over the lost of his son. In the case of Alex Jones, this individual seems to be more of an extreme theorist as he comes up with theories for almost every event out there. He believes that “pure evil is running everywhere”, and this sort of makes him look more like a paranoid individual (or the documentary just portrayed him that way).
Michael Shermer, a skeptic of the film believes that there needs to be evidence to prove the theory true. Conspiracy theorists are considered to the opposite and believe that the evidence is just “hidden” which proves it true. This would then be saying that a conspiracy theorist make assumptions based on what they feel is right instead of looking at the facts.
The documentary also states that those who are apart of an ethnic minority, disconnected from mainstream politics, and those who are low-income earners are more likely to become a conspiracy believer. However, even if an individual is a part of one or all three of these categories, there are other factors that could lead them into being more of a skeptic. The idea of exposure to these theories is also mentioned in this film. This can be seen as important because people you know play a big role in your everyday life. They could change your perspective in an instant, and if you were also exposed to the ideas of Alex Jones, you would eventually start to consider his ideas as well.
janelleanne
As a documentary, conspiracy raising seems to be pretty biased, because it trying to say that people who believed conspiracy theories are ignoring the evidence which can prove the truth instead of finding the evidence which can prove the their beliefs. And also the university psychological experiment about the students who are told the leader of the country is died by the assassination attack tend to think conspiracy theories are involved and the public questionnaire survey indicate that people who are from ethnic minority and do not believe main stream politicians and medias are tend to be conspiracists.
ReplyDeleteI think conspiracy theories can never demonstrate the truth of itself. Conspiracists seem to be irrational, very skeptical, and anti government in the documentary. The second part of the documentary about the UFO event seems to be very ridiculous to me. I do not know if the CBC-doc zone chose the materials on purpose in order to make conspiracy theories be more unbelievable.
In contrast, to analyze the conspiracy theories through the psychological and philosophic approaches are more convincing to me personally.
After viewing this documentary, it has shown that conspiracies are a very real entity in the world today. In fact, most of the experts stated that it is human nature to believe what others tell us. This does make sense for a number of reasons.
ReplyDeleteThe 9/11 terrorist attack is probably the biggest conspiracy at the moment. Many people in the United States believe that the government knew it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it. Where are these people getting their information? It seems like the first person that came up with a "legitimate" explanation as to how and why it happened is the person whom everyone believes. I personally do not believe that the government knew about the attack. If they did, there would have been some plan in place to prevent such a thing from happening, but there was nothing. Part of this conspiracy, and all conspiracies, is that we believe that we have control over what happens in our live. This is true to a certain extent. You do have control over where you work, what you eat, what you wear, what you drive. The things you don't have control over are things like car accidents, public shootings, vandalism; things that seem random and misplaced. Those are things that bring disorder and chaos to the world, but they are necessary elements to keep the world in balance.
The assassination of John F. Kennedy is another popular conspiracy theory in which a lone gunman shot the president. Again, where is this information coming from? I have no doubt that he was shot, but I don't believe that it was from one single person; and basically no one special for that matter. Most murder-type events are believed to be caused by someone that was known by the victim. Even in this case, it may have been caused by someone that was well known to J.F.K., and simply wanted him dead. It may have been for a wrong doing to that person in the recent past, or many years before hand. That person may have seen his presidency as the prime opportunity to exact his revenge. Clearly, no one knows exactly what happened that day to cause such a tragedy to occur, but some random set of circumstances happened to line up to one perfect shot by someone that knew him very well.
Princess Diana's death was also believe to be a conspiracy. The fact that she said her husband was planning on having her killed in a staged car accident kind of shocked me a little bit. It also didn't seem to make a whole lot of sense to me either. What could he possibly gain from killing his own wife? Granted that she was of royal decent, so maybe he was after he money and the only way to get it was by having her die in an accident of some type. On the other hand, the story provided to the press originally was that she died at the hand of a drunk driver, which makes much more sense than a plot to stage a car accident. Again, it seems like a random assortment of events that just happened to take place to cause a tragedy. It may make me seem like a skeptic, and truthfully, I am. I have just learned over the last few years to start thinking more critically about things like these and not believe everything I read. As this documentary unfolded, I started thinking about the mentioned conspiracies and how they may have come about. Then I started thinking a little more as to what the story was saying about the events that occurred, and if they made sense to me. Listening to the conspirators give statements as to how things "actually" happened, made some sense to a certain point; but then it seemed like all rational thought vanished. No matter how badly you don't want something to turn into a conspiracy, eventually something will come around. As long as you keep an open mind to the possibility that something out of the ordinary could potentially happen makes you who you are; we are all human, and we all make mistakes.
Conspiracy theories seem to be a way for people to rationalize things they either don’t understand, or don’t want to believe. We live in a random and irrational world and it is good to be skeptical and think critically, but not everything has an equal cause and effect. In the same way religion is a false belief in the reality of death, conspiracy theories are a false belief in the irrationality of life. Even with ever evolving scientific evidence to support theories like evolution, people choose to have a blind faith in unconfirmed or even disproved beliefs. It isn’t a mystery why conspiracy theorists tend to be lower income and probably lower IQ people, they tend to be unhappier with their situation in life and need to rationalize a reason why it isn’t better. Instead of doing something about it they manifest a theory of how the whole world is run by a few people and everything is a conspiracy.
ReplyDeleteHow do we know what we think we know? A main source is learned knowledge and that comes down to how much trust we have in the teacher. The credibility of the information source is just as, if not more important than the actual information. If you don’t trust the source, it doesn’t matter how convincing the argument is, you wont believe it. That is why there are so many conspiracies today; the JFK was a breaking point where Americans lost trust in their government. Just in the same way we have no trust in advertising today, and once the trust is gone you can never get it back.
Even if some “conspiracies” have legitimate evidence to back them up it is hard to get people to believe them because anyone arguing this is deemed a conspiracy theorist, which is essentially calling them untrustworthy. To be honest most of the people I hear speaking about these theories don’t seem credible or that bright. Even though Alex Jones is a fairly successful conspiracy theorist he seems like a crazy eccentric and totally not credible. Not everything is a conspiracy and he also seemed a bit like a mini Rush Limbaugh. There are credible sources that are providing the information we need on the issues that need to be addressed like Fareed Zakaria. Why we are spending our time worrying about conspiracy theories or what celebrity is fat or pregnant while there are many much more pressing issues facing the world today is beyond me, but to each his own.
Conspiracy is a complex term with a lot of connotations and stigma attached to it. For actual evidence based explanations of events, being deemed a conspiracy is more debilitating than helpful. I’m sure there are a lot of things that have happened in the world that have alternate explanations, but there are also a lot that are purely random. The age of the Internet is prime time for conspiracy theorists and some are intriguing, but ultimately usually a waste of time. It is important to think critically, but also important to think logically and realize that not everything can be explained, the earth is a random place.
I feel that the documentary "Conspiracy Rising" is somewhat biased towards the conspiracy theorists as the film only seems to interview these people and get their sides of each conspiracy theory, rather than talking to people who are against these theories. Although, for this reason it seems like the whole point of the documentary is to reveal to the public how real conspiracy theories are and how many people believe in them and dedicate much of their life towards proving them right.
ReplyDeleteThis documentary shows conspiracy theorists in a way that most people wouldn't picture. A lot of the time conspiracy theorists seem skeptical about too much in life and sometimes do so because they dislike the government or other higher powers, but in this film conspiracy theorists are shown differently. This includes a father who's son died in the 9/11 attacks and just wants to find out what really happened to his son for closure. A couple on a honeymoon were also shown as conspiracy theorists going to Area 51 as they are confident that aliens have reached Earth and their curiosity brought them here. This just shows the diversity of conspiracy theorists throughout America and that conspiracy theorists aren't always crazed people trying to bring negative publicity to certain powers.
Conspiracy Rising is an interesting film that seems to portray all the different types of conspiracy theorist out there and why they develop those theories.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that one of the speakers says that we tend
to believe in conspiracies because we tend to believe what people
tell us. But then how is that any different than believing every single thing that the government tells us? It is no secret that the government do keep vital and unimaginable secrets from the public; if they were to inform us of everything that went on imagine the chaos there would be because no one would feel safe and no one would trust anyone. Whether someone is a conspiracy theorist or not, it is not even possible to believe everything that the government tell us what "actually" happened. But of course there is a line when a theory sounds possible, and when it just sounds plain crazy. One of the speakers talking about Princess Diana's death says at first he couldn't believe that she was murdered because no one, such as Prince Charles, could be that cruel. Well, even if it can be proven that he is not a cruel man, that's an ineffective way to base your belief on what you believe actually happened. Another speaker said that there is no evidence to back up theories, but sometimes the evidence that is no there and is missing is just as important.
Then there are theorist like Alex Jones who seems to strike fear into people by going bananas on how there is so much evil in the world. I have no doubt that there are so many things that we can even imagine are going on without us knowing, so what Jones believes is not my problem. My problem is how he goes about showing those beliefs. He does it in a way that people either hate him or they follow him and there is no middle line. Even if everything in this world is just one big conspiracy, there are things that are better left silent because sometimes for some ignorance is bliss.
This was my second time watching "Conspiracy Rising" allowing for me to watch with a slightly different perspective. The video brings up very important and interesting points on recent conspiracy theories that cause us all to struggle and grasp at what information we have. I feel this film is focused more on the believers of these conspiracy theories; however, the individuals they chose to interview that were discrediting conspiracy believers, made very valid points. When individuals do not have sufficient evidence it is easy for them to try and find answers to their questions. Humans are programmed to try and fill in the blanks to find answers. Personally I find most conspiracy theories crazy with few valid points. It is alright for individuals to become interested with conspiracy theories but without sufficient evidence they should not believe everything they here.
ReplyDeleteThe film "Conspiracy Rising" depicts conspiracy theorists as being paranoid and skeptical. This documentary is very one sided, and makes it seem that those that believe in conspiracy theories are phycological unstable, and go on to posses traits that give them a conformational bias when looking at the evidence. I do agree that conformational biases exist in many cases , but the film depicts that this exist in all cases when a conspiracy is present. Many of the individuals interview in the film (such as Mohammed) are presented as being paranoid and dilusional. The film then goes on to state that individuals from ethnic minorities, that are disconnected from politics or that have a lower income are more likely to believe conspiracy theories. So apperantly if an individual believes in a conspiracy theory then they are part of one of these undesirable groups. In responce most viewers would dismiss the idea of conspiracy theories as they do not want to be associated with any of these groups.
ReplyDeleteI also found it interesting how the film asked the audience to do a survey. This survey resulted in telling you how susceptible you are to believing a conspiracy theory.The questions asked are vague, and indirectly persuade the viewer into thinking they are being simply paranoid. Overall this film served as propaganda designed to dismiss the very ideas of conspiracy theories, and tells the audience that it is better to be ignorant than to think for yourself, because individuals that think for themselves are crazy
I found that the documentary pretty much ridiculed conspiracy theorists. While it would try and back their theories up, it seemed to almost take a joking manner. I felt as though it tried to re-enhance what the theorists believe, then throw it back in their faces by saying things like “they’ll believe anything they read as long as they already agree with it”. Or in the case of Princess Diana, they made it seem like an honest accident and that the theorist was just a nut job. But who are we to judge if he was really told that they were planning her death or not? In the theorist’s defense, I doubt he would want to start such uproar during a tragedy. So maybe he really was just trying to tell the truth.
ReplyDeleteWhile much of the video seemed biased to me, I did agree with some of it. I liked that they said that people believe what they hear, because it’s true. While we may not know the facts, humans will believe just about anything we’re told and continue to spread it. Especially with sources such as the internet; where anyone and everyone has some opinion. No matter how ridiculous it may be.
I found that the documentary really made conspiracy theorist seem ridiculous for thinking that way, and made them come across as a demographic of people who had something wrong with their mind, usually brought on by a sort of traumatizing event in their past called "Flashbulb Memories". I think the video was very biased in a way Although hearing that 1/3 of Americans think that the government is lying about 9/11 was kind of an eye opener. But with someone like Alex Jones feeding these people with conspiracies with that charismatic tone of his it's no wonder so many people have fallen for this hype.
ReplyDeleteThis goes along with the princess Diana car accident. they made the theorist seem crazy for thinking that it was planned. which i don't personally believe that it was organized, but it was a very biased opinion in the movie i think. over all i really liked it and gave a good insight on conspiracy theorists.