Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
Wiley (2008), Edition: 1, Paperback, 258 pages
Description
Why has punditry lately overtaken news? Why do lies seem to linger so long in the cultural subconscious even after they've been thoroughly discredited? And why, when more people than ever before are documenting the truth with laptops and digital cameras, does fact-free spin and propaganda seem to work so well? True Enough explores leading controversies of national politics, foreign affairs, science, and business, explaining how Americans have begun to organize themselves into echo chambers that harbor diametrically different facts--not merely opinions--from those of the larger culture.
Media reviews
Having read True Enough, I feel like I'm more ready to examine my selective perception and cherished illusions. And that's certainly worth the price of admission.
User reviews
LibraryThing member fr3dt3ch
The author presents a convincing theory about how we are creating our own versions of "truth" (reality), aided by the multiple dispersion of information on the Internet and in the media. This dispersion and repackaging of facts only adds to fragment society. This tends to conflict with our general
Show More
idea that because of how readily available so much information is, we should be headed more towards a consensus of facts, of the "truth". I like this book for the idea it presents and the psychology behind it; however, I found that the author tended to drag out ideas and in fact seemed a bit subjective towards some ideas himself. Leading, of course, to the question of how much the author is creating his own truth, as well. Show Less
LibraryThing member rivkat
Manjoo has compelling stories to tell—how the Swift Boat Veterans defamed John Kerry, how theories that the 2004 elections were stolen persist—and persuasive science backing up his arguments that we mostly believe the facts we want to believe. The book is ultimately defeated, however, by two
Show More
related things: First, despite the title, Manjoo has no good advice for dealing with this problem; one could infer that “maintain a healthy skepticism about claims that support your side” could help, but that’s not exactly attacking the problem at its core, especially since the real damage occurs when we’re certain that we’re perceiving reality absolutely unvarnished. Second, implicit throughout (and often all but explicit) is the idea that, before the internet, when there were few mass media sources of information, we (in the US; he doesn’t cover elsewhere) got the Truth. When in fact, because of the psychological phenomena Manjoo covers and the nature of power, what we got was what a bunch of white men thought was the truth. What would Malcolm X say to the claim that Walter Cronkite was the voice of neutrality? What about Betty Friedan, or Angela Davis? The line “A lie is halfway round the world before the truth has got its boots on” is over a hundred and fifty years old; Manjoo claims that the internet makes things worse because now everyone can find an outlet for/apparent confirmation of their own wacky theories, but never persuasively makes the case that it was better for only powerful white men to get mainstream confirmation of their wacky theories. Show Less
LibraryThing member NielsenGW
Information is all around us. From the Internet to 24-hour news networks to experts to neighbors, every place you look, there is someone with information. But what transforms information into fact, and what exactly are facts? How do we interpret them? How do we separate “Fact” from “fact”?
Manjoo plods through many areas of selective truth: the 2000 and 2004 US presidential elections, the 9/11 attacks, and the Kennedy assassination. Each of these events is ingrained enough in our collective memory that everybody thinks they have a hold of the truth of each event. But, then, why are there still pockets of individuals who contradict the collective memory? How does their version of the event shape ours? Manjoo incorporates many elements of social and cognitive psychology (such as naïve realism, selective perception, and weak dissonance) to show how new information interacts with personal ideas and beliefs.
He also looks at broadcast news and media presentation and how presenting information with the je ne sais quoi of truth is enough to make it believable. There’s the usual digressions into Steve Colbert’s truthiness campaign and James Frey’s fictional autobiography. The problem with all this talk of half-truths and almost-lies is that it seems to the reader that nothing can be trusted. Every picture in the newspaper could be manipulated; each news account could be potential propaganda. This book makes the reader feel as they’ve been catapulted down the rabbit hole with no hope of escape. Luckily, it’s a quick tidy volume that doesn’t get too bogged down with itself. The trick here is to think critically and trust your judgment when it comes to information. All in all, an interesting read.
Show More
When does truth become Truth? Farhad Manjoo’s True Enough explores the delicate areas between facts and truth to help us see how we deal with new information and ideas that challenge our beliefs.Manjoo plods through many areas of selective truth: the 2000 and 2004 US presidential elections, the 9/11 attacks, and the Kennedy assassination. Each of these events is ingrained enough in our collective memory that everybody thinks they have a hold of the truth of each event. But, then, why are there still pockets of individuals who contradict the collective memory? How does their version of the event shape ours? Manjoo incorporates many elements of social and cognitive psychology (such as naïve realism, selective perception, and weak dissonance) to show how new information interacts with personal ideas and beliefs.
He also looks at broadcast news and media presentation and how presenting information with the je ne sais quoi of truth is enough to make it believable. There’s the usual digressions into Steve Colbert’s truthiness campaign and James Frey’s fictional autobiography. The problem with all this talk of half-truths and almost-lies is that it seems to the reader that nothing can be trusted. Every picture in the newspaper could be manipulated; each news account could be potential propaganda. This book makes the reader feel as they’ve been catapulted down the rabbit hole with no hope of escape. Luckily, it’s a quick tidy volume that doesn’t get too bogged down with itself. The trick here is to think critically and trust your judgment when it comes to information. All in all, an interesting read.
Show Less
LibraryThing member dmcolon
"True Enough" by Farhad Manjoo, is another in the long line of books that argues that new technologies are changing the way we approach knowledge. Manjoo's contention is that the new media has made it much easier for people to selectively choose what information they process. This allows them to
Manjoo provides lots of case studies ranging from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, to 9/11 Deniers, to those who think that the 2004 presidential election was fixed. In themselves, these case studies are pretty interesting, but he never really convinces me that any of this is essentially different than what preceded the new media. He asserts that the right-wing talk network is different from what preceded it, but provides little in specific proof. Father Coughlin in the 1930s had his own little right-wing network. He compares the Kennedy assassination conspiracy theorists with the 2004 election conspiracy theorists, but never really shows the difference between the two.
I'm skeptical that Manjoo can ever make his case -- I firmly think that the whole apocalyptic approach to new media is overblown and alarmist. Still, I'm open to the idea that it might be the case. But the author never really makes the necessary logical connections. He provides lots of specific information and he makes lots of interesting assertions, but if you examine the text closely, he never actually links the two together in any meaningful way. Given the author's presumed defense of some sort of objective truth and logic, this is a rather startling oversight.
There are some pretty broad assertions in the book that took me aback as well. He argues that conservatives are more prone to filter out information that contradicts their ideological mindset more than progressives. Now don't get me wrong here, I'm a progressive. But I've known plenty of fellow leftists who are as dogmatic and closed-minded as any conservative. I've also known some pretty open-minded conservatives. He cites one university study as proof. In the end, I think True Enough is as "true enough" as some of the items he tackles in the book.
Show More
develop their own versions of the truth which are essentially impervious to any outside information. It's an interesting argument, but he does a pretty poor job of actually supporting it. Manjoo provides lots of case studies ranging from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, to 9/11 Deniers, to those who think that the 2004 presidential election was fixed. In themselves, these case studies are pretty interesting, but he never really convinces me that any of this is essentially different than what preceded the new media. He asserts that the right-wing talk network is different from what preceded it, but provides little in specific proof. Father Coughlin in the 1930s had his own little right-wing network. He compares the Kennedy assassination conspiracy theorists with the 2004 election conspiracy theorists, but never really shows the difference between the two.
I'm skeptical that Manjoo can ever make his case -- I firmly think that the whole apocalyptic approach to new media is overblown and alarmist. Still, I'm open to the idea that it might be the case. But the author never really makes the necessary logical connections. He provides lots of specific information and he makes lots of interesting assertions, but if you examine the text closely, he never actually links the two together in any meaningful way. Given the author's presumed defense of some sort of objective truth and logic, this is a rather startling oversight.
There are some pretty broad assertions in the book that took me aback as well. He argues that conservatives are more prone to filter out information that contradicts their ideological mindset more than progressives. Now don't get me wrong here, I'm a progressive. But I've known plenty of fellow leftists who are as dogmatic and closed-minded as any conservative. I've also known some pretty open-minded conservatives. He cites one university study as proof. In the end, I think True Enough is as "true enough" as some of the items he tackles in the book.
Show Less
LibraryThing member tyroeternal
While the conclusion of the argument came across as a bit overextended, there is an interesting point to what he is saying. Sheltering ourselves through selective input is not something I would consider to be a new occurence, and limited only to new media.
LibraryThing member wbc3
A look at how Americans care more about "truthiness" than truth. As defined by Stephen Colbert, truthiness is "the quality of a thing feeling true without any evidence suggesting it was." The book uses far more examples of the Right using these tactics, but does give some examples on the Left. I
Show More
would recommend the book to anyone who cares about the media and political discourse in 21st Century America. Don't expect, however, to read this and be encouraged! Show Less
LibraryThing member kropferama
While the premise and conclusion of the book resonates, I found this book hard to follow in the main chapters. Many of the studies seemed to be down in the weeds and wander off the main points of the book.
Subjects
Language
Original language
English
Physical description
258 p.; 5.98 inches
ISBN
1620458403 / 9781620458402