What do you think?
Rate this book
Post-Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back
Welcome to the Post-Truth era— a time in which the art of the lie is shaking the very foundations of democracy and the world as we know it. The Brexit vote; Donald Trump’s victory; the rejection of climate change science; the vilification of immigrants; all have been based on the power to evoke feelings and not facts. So what does it all mean and how can we champion truth in in a time of lies and ‘alternative facts’?
In this eye-opening and timely book, Post-Truth is distinguished from a long tradition of political lies, exaggeration and spin. What is new is not the mendacity of politicians but the public’s response to it and the ability of new technologies and social media to manipulate, polarise and entrench opinion. Where trust has evaporated, conspiracy theories thrive, the authority of the media wilt and emotions matter more than facts.
Now, one of the UK’s most respected political journalists, Matthew d’Ancona investigates how we got here, why quiet resignation is not an option and how we can and must fight back.
In this eye-opening and timely book, Post-Truth is distinguished from a long tradition of political lies, exaggeration and spin. What is new is not the mendacity of politicians but the public’s response to it and the ability of new technologies and social media to manipulate, polarise and entrench opinion. Where trust has evaporated, conspiracy theories thrive, the authority of the media wilt and emotions matter more than facts.
Now, one of the UK’s most respected political journalists, Matthew d’Ancona investigates how we got here, why quiet resignation is not an option and how we can and must fight back.
167 pages, Paperback
First published May 11, 2017
80 people are currently reading
934 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 116 reviews
May 20, 2017
I received a copy of this book from Netgalley, in exchange for an honest review.
A vital read if you're concerned about the way the world is going...
For a while now, I (like many people), have been worried about this notion of post-truth, or as Kellyanne Conway so succinctly put it - alternative facts. It all sounded horribly 'double-speak' to me - this notion that politicians and the media were no longer constrained by the obligation to be truthful - they could simply repackage 'facts' to suit their purpose.
This book explores the subject in depth, from the Brexit vote in Britain to Trump's victory in the US. It explores the rise of post-truth, how society paved the path to let it become 'a thing', and also, its history. Intriguingly enough, it's nothing new! It also highlights the dangers of apathy - how lies can flourish with the assistance widespread, weary acceptance. Worrying, damning stuff - and also vitally important to think about.
It's a relatively short book, but not a word is out of place. In our modern world - a world where 'fake news' is rife online, where politicians appeal to feelings and emotions, rather than sticking to the facts - it's a thought-provoking, highly relevant read.
A vital read if you're concerned about the way the world is going...
For a while now, I (like many people), have been worried about this notion of post-truth, or as Kellyanne Conway so succinctly put it - alternative facts. It all sounded horribly 'double-speak' to me - this notion that politicians and the media were no longer constrained by the obligation to be truthful - they could simply repackage 'facts' to suit their purpose.
This book explores the subject in depth, from the Brexit vote in Britain to Trump's victory in the US. It explores the rise of post-truth, how society paved the path to let it become 'a thing', and also, its history. Intriguingly enough, it's nothing new! It also highlights the dangers of apathy - how lies can flourish with the assistance widespread, weary acceptance. Worrying, damning stuff - and also vitally important to think about.
It's a relatively short book, but not a word is out of place. In our modern world - a world where 'fake news' is rife online, where politicians appeal to feelings and emotions, rather than sticking to the facts - it's a thought-provoking, highly relevant read.
July 30, 2017
This concise and straightforward primer on post-truth politics and culture is basically an essay organised into five chapters (the paperback is a pleasingly compact, pocket-sized book). Inevitably, d'Ancona talks a lot about 2016, the year post-truth exploded, and its two political juggernauts – Trump and Brexit – but the main thrust of his argument, frequently reinforced, is that while it may be tempting to believe the post-truth/'fake news' era will die whenever Trump leaves office, such an assumption is dangerously reductive. Instead, he sees the 'shock' triumph of both campaigns as the natural result of an underlying trend involving the collapse of trust in authority, rejection of scientific evidence, the spread of conspiracy theories and a tendency to prioritise emotion above truth. It's a decent introduction to a thorny subject, even if there are some dubious points: for example, I'm leery of the way the book lays the blame for the current political climate at the door of postmodernism. Towards the end it briefly goes off on a tangent in the vein of 'well if everyone would just get off their smartphones and social media and engage with their communities...' – surely harking back to the same imaginary idyllic past that d'Ancona's main objects of criticism have so successfully invoked.
Overall, a good summary whose flaws don't stop it from being informative and useful – but if you've read a handful of longform pieces on this topic, I don't think you need to buy it.
TinyLetter | Twitter | Instagram | Tumblr
Overall, a good summary whose flaws don't stop it from being informative and useful – but if you've read a handful of longform pieces on this topic, I don't think you need to buy it.
TinyLetter | Twitter | Instagram | Tumblr
November 29, 2018
I received this book from Netgalley, in exchange for an honest review
As we find ourselves knee-deep in the troubling reality of the post truth era d’Ancona’s book clearly and concisely relates how we came from the rationalism of the Enlightenment to our present parlous state of affairs.
He explains how Trump and Brexit have brought the phenomenon into focus but that they are the symptoms not the cause.
He shows how, as with so many disasters, it started with good intention, the attempt to include minorities and alternative points of view. How in attempting to achieve equality for all people we have let our decision-making processes develope in to a situation where all opinions are equal, conspiracy theorists are accorded the same standing as educated professionals, and emotions reign supreme while fact is despised and treated with derision.
d’Ancona lays out clearly why in this new reality fact-based arguments are dismissed and why arguments based on science, fact and rationalism are so ineffectual a response.
In this new emotion-based reality it doesn’t matter that what you say is demonstrably true if people feel it is not!
This book left me wondering how we can possibly frame our arguments to be more effectual while staying faithful to rationalist ideas.
Just as importantly, it convinced me that our first responsibility is to train ourselves to analyses faulty reasoning both in ourselves and in others.
Clear, concise, thought-provoking, relevant. Well worth your time.
As we find ourselves knee-deep in the troubling reality of the post truth era d’Ancona’s book clearly and concisely relates how we came from the rationalism of the Enlightenment to our present parlous state of affairs.
He explains how Trump and Brexit have brought the phenomenon into focus but that they are the symptoms not the cause.
He shows how, as with so many disasters, it started with good intention, the attempt to include minorities and alternative points of view. How in attempting to achieve equality for all people we have let our decision-making processes develope in to a situation where all opinions are equal, conspiracy theorists are accorded the same standing as educated professionals, and emotions reign supreme while fact is despised and treated with derision.
d’Ancona lays out clearly why in this new reality fact-based arguments are dismissed and why arguments based on science, fact and rationalism are so ineffectual a response.
In this new emotion-based reality it doesn’t matter that what you say is demonstrably true if people feel it is not!
This book left me wondering how we can possibly frame our arguments to be more effectual while staying faithful to rationalist ideas.
Just as importantly, it convinced me that our first responsibility is to train ourselves to analyses faulty reasoning both in ourselves and in others.
Clear, concise, thought-provoking, relevant. Well worth your time.
May 26, 2017
For my full review: http://girlwithherheadinabook.co.uk/2...
Fake news. Alternative facts. Post truth. Three terms to strike a chill into the heart. Despite the concept of 'post truth' having only really burst into our cultural consciousness within the past year or so, over the scant 176 pages of his book, Matthew D'Ancona makes it clear that we have been headed this way for a while. Former editor of The Spectator, D'Ancona is a journalist with a formidable CV. Unusually for me, I had mixed feelings on whether I would want to actually pick this up (on the one hand, I like to be informed but on the other, I have found most of the major news stories over the past year unutterably depressing) but reading the accompanying Guardian article on key 'post-truth' terms, I decided to put my faith in D'Ancona to explain the topic without making me want to move to a small Hebridean island and remove myself from the Internet forever. While there are times when Post Truth does feel a little like diving into an unheated swimming pool, D'Ancona manages to be both engaging and informative whilst also having practical solutions for how best we can move forward. One of the more necessary reads of our times, D'Ancona's book is a handbook for survival and a well-written one at that.
Myself, I have always been something of a stickler. I can absolutely kill an anecdote by adding too much detail - I struggle to refer to a person within a story as a 'friend' rather than offering the more precise and accurate note of 'my third-cousin-once-removed' or 'my next-door-neighbour's niece's husband'. Even more irritatingly, as a child, if I heard other people using the same verbal short-hand, I would immediately feel the urge to correct them, unable to stomach the untruth. This is not a way to make or indeed keep friends. Also unhelpful was that while in sixth form, I read virtually the entirety of Snopes and could chirpily debunk a lot of the hilarious or terrifying news items which tended to pop up in people's inboxes in the early 2000s. Facts are not fun. They spoil a good story. People prefer to believe in the untruth, it is more emotionally satisfying. However, D'Ancona explains that the way that this 'emotional necessity trumps strict adherence to the truth' is what has got us to where we are now.
Unsurprisingly, D'Ancona cites his sources with great care throughout. The stories pumped around the world to discredit Hilary Clinton, the 350 million that was never going to go to the NHS instead, the dossier that was either beefed-up, sexed-up or the rantings of a taxi driver - these are all stories which we know to be false but which have caused little or no harm to those who originally peddled the lies. D'Ancona cites one of George W Bush's aides who told a New York Times journalist that his approach was lamentably outdated since being in the 'reality-based community' is not the way the world works any more. And while people still concerned with truth are studying reality, those such as George W Bush's administration were ready to 'act again, creating other new realities'. We see this every day. It is impossible to keep up with.
D'Ancona charts the loss of faith from 2008, when the financial crisis hit but while those on the bottom rungs of society might suffer, it became clear that the big corporations would not be allowed to fail. Those at the top would never pay the piper but they would call the tune. Then there was the MP expenses scandal, causing people to lose faith in our elected representatives. Then came the phone-hacking saga which undermined our faith in the media. Then Operation Yewtree, which showed that not only were big corporations such as the BBC turning a blind eye to unspeakable crimes but so many of the nation's most celebrated entertainers were not who they appeared to be. So we lost faith. We stopped believing. We no longer trusted 'experts'.
D'Ancona keeps the detached tone of the observer but as he chronicles the bizarre presidential campaign and subsequent victory of Mr Donald Trump, he finds it difficult to hide the extent to which he is, like the rest of us, both baffled and appalled. Breaking the garble that has come out of the Orange One down to its components, D'Ancona notes how Trump can argue that 'sources of the stories are authentic - bt the reports were nonetheless fake. Truly, we [are] through the looking glass'. Still, this is not really a book about Trump, but rather how we and those around us perceive the world. As D'Ancona observes, Trump is the symptom rather than the cause and post-truthism will not be cured when he leaves office, whenever that is.
There are certain issues raised by the book however which are particularly alarming. The fact that Alex Jones, the right-wing host of Infowars, is known to be in contact with Donald Trump disturbed me deeply. This is the man who purports to believe that the Sandy Hook massacre was faked and that the Clintons are involved in Satanic child abuse. I found it alarming too that in 2005, the American Museum of National History was unable to secure corporate sponsorship for its exhibition on Darwin because all the companies approached feared a backlash from creationists. By contrast, in 2007, a 27 million dollar creationist museum was built in Kentucky, with bumper stickers sold there stating 'We're Taking Dinosaurs Back'. As in, returning them. Because you can change scientific history if you don't like it. It reminds me of a university debate I attended at around the same time, 'This House Prefers Darwin to God', where a girl stood up and said that she was 'not happy' to be descended from a chimp and so she would be voting against the motion. Another girl stood up and said that the previous year she had been 'not happy' about having a 9am class, that she was currently 'not happy' about George W Bush being the president of her country, but that the simple fact of being 'not happy' about something cannot make it untrue.
I find myself wondering too at the selfishness of the attitude behind a lot of this - it is as if a truth which is unpalatable can simply be repackaged. I remember a woman around the 2010 election complaining on the news about how the results had not reflected her vote, and that had she been in a restaurant and been served chocolate cake when she had ordered cheesecake, something would be done about it. Have we become so self-absorbed that we can no longer accept a majority decision, or, far worse, a compromise? D'Ancona suggests that the American election result, and by extension the Brexit result, was the product of a disenfranchised, disillusioned populace sending the biggest 'F***k You' to their government in history. How have we got to the point where people are so willing to go against the facts and hurt their own prospects out of such pointless spite? Have we become such children that we sigh heavily during the boring facts about how far Britain's GDP will dip under Brexit and that most households will be around £300 worse off per year, and just giggle away at funny Mr Farage with his pint? Has our attention span become so microscopic?
Still, anyone could write a searing take-down of reasons why truth, facts and indeed reality have come under threat. What makes D'Ancona's book worth reading is that it is not just an analysis of the situation, but also an attempt to offer a solution. Post Truth is a piece of political advocacy, independent of specific political affiliation, with the final chapter entitled 'The Stench of Lies: Strategies to Defeat Post Truth'. I remember being struck back in my teaching days by the way in which children struggled to discern the differences between reliable and unreliable sources on the Internet. On one particular occasion, an ICT lesson returned three different answers for the question 'When was Churchill born?' As D'Ancona explains, this needs to be a key part of education. He points out that we save time in that answers can be found in our fingertips whereas for most of my school days I had to trawl through books. However, there is a balance to this - we need to add in time for fact-checking. This takes patience, but it needs to become embedded, with D'Ancona rightly observing, 'Learning how to navigate the web with discernment is the most pressing cultural missing of our age'.
Ending with 'Reasons to be Cheerful', Post Truth is an upbeat read, reminding us that all is not lost and trying to point out areas of recovery. Kellyanne Conway's exhortation to believe in 'alternative facts' sent Nineteen Eighty Four rocketing up the bestseller lists. Satire too can expose weakness and raise awareness. Deborah Lipstadt did not lose her case against David Irving and the recent film Denial reignites that point. There are 'science' celebrities such as Professor Brian Cox who can help make facts 'sexy' again (if they ever were). Still, I came away feeling afraid, fretting over the ever shrinking news cycle and goldfish memory that the media seems to assume we have - if they have to get the story out before we lose interest, there is no time for 'research' and due diligence, which leaves us with something that feels true but may not be. Post truth.
Fake news. Alternative facts. Post truth. Three terms to strike a chill into the heart. Despite the concept of 'post truth' having only really burst into our cultural consciousness within the past year or so, over the scant 176 pages of his book, Matthew D'Ancona makes it clear that we have been headed this way for a while. Former editor of The Spectator, D'Ancona is a journalist with a formidable CV. Unusually for me, I had mixed feelings on whether I would want to actually pick this up (on the one hand, I like to be informed but on the other, I have found most of the major news stories over the past year unutterably depressing) but reading the accompanying Guardian article on key 'post-truth' terms, I decided to put my faith in D'Ancona to explain the topic without making me want to move to a small Hebridean island and remove myself from the Internet forever. While there are times when Post Truth does feel a little like diving into an unheated swimming pool, D'Ancona manages to be both engaging and informative whilst also having practical solutions for how best we can move forward. One of the more necessary reads of our times, D'Ancona's book is a handbook for survival and a well-written one at that.
Myself, I have always been something of a stickler. I can absolutely kill an anecdote by adding too much detail - I struggle to refer to a person within a story as a 'friend' rather than offering the more precise and accurate note of 'my third-cousin-once-removed' or 'my next-door-neighbour's niece's husband'. Even more irritatingly, as a child, if I heard other people using the same verbal short-hand, I would immediately feel the urge to correct them, unable to stomach the untruth. This is not a way to make or indeed keep friends. Also unhelpful was that while in sixth form, I read virtually the entirety of Snopes and could chirpily debunk a lot of the hilarious or terrifying news items which tended to pop up in people's inboxes in the early 2000s. Facts are not fun. They spoil a good story. People prefer to believe in the untruth, it is more emotionally satisfying. However, D'Ancona explains that the way that this 'emotional necessity trumps strict adherence to the truth' is what has got us to where we are now.
Unsurprisingly, D'Ancona cites his sources with great care throughout. The stories pumped around the world to discredit Hilary Clinton, the 350 million that was never going to go to the NHS instead, the dossier that was either beefed-up, sexed-up or the rantings of a taxi driver - these are all stories which we know to be false but which have caused little or no harm to those who originally peddled the lies. D'Ancona cites one of George W Bush's aides who told a New York Times journalist that his approach was lamentably outdated since being in the 'reality-based community' is not the way the world works any more. And while people still concerned with truth are studying reality, those such as George W Bush's administration were ready to 'act again, creating other new realities'. We see this every day. It is impossible to keep up with.
D'Ancona charts the loss of faith from 2008, when the financial crisis hit but while those on the bottom rungs of society might suffer, it became clear that the big corporations would not be allowed to fail. Those at the top would never pay the piper but they would call the tune. Then there was the MP expenses scandal, causing people to lose faith in our elected representatives. Then came the phone-hacking saga which undermined our faith in the media. Then Operation Yewtree, which showed that not only were big corporations such as the BBC turning a blind eye to unspeakable crimes but so many of the nation's most celebrated entertainers were not who they appeared to be. So we lost faith. We stopped believing. We no longer trusted 'experts'.
D'Ancona keeps the detached tone of the observer but as he chronicles the bizarre presidential campaign and subsequent victory of Mr Donald Trump, he finds it difficult to hide the extent to which he is, like the rest of us, both baffled and appalled. Breaking the garble that has come out of the Orange One down to its components, D'Ancona notes how Trump can argue that 'sources of the stories are authentic - bt the reports were nonetheless fake. Truly, we [are] through the looking glass'. Still, this is not really a book about Trump, but rather how we and those around us perceive the world. As D'Ancona observes, Trump is the symptom rather than the cause and post-truthism will not be cured when he leaves office, whenever that is.
There are certain issues raised by the book however which are particularly alarming. The fact that Alex Jones, the right-wing host of Infowars, is known to be in contact with Donald Trump disturbed me deeply. This is the man who purports to believe that the Sandy Hook massacre was faked and that the Clintons are involved in Satanic child abuse. I found it alarming too that in 2005, the American Museum of National History was unable to secure corporate sponsorship for its exhibition on Darwin because all the companies approached feared a backlash from creationists. By contrast, in 2007, a 27 million dollar creationist museum was built in Kentucky, with bumper stickers sold there stating 'We're Taking Dinosaurs Back'. As in, returning them. Because you can change scientific history if you don't like it. It reminds me of a university debate I attended at around the same time, 'This House Prefers Darwin to God', where a girl stood up and said that she was 'not happy' to be descended from a chimp and so she would be voting against the motion. Another girl stood up and said that the previous year she had been 'not happy' about having a 9am class, that she was currently 'not happy' about George W Bush being the president of her country, but that the simple fact of being 'not happy' about something cannot make it untrue.
I find myself wondering too at the selfishness of the attitude behind a lot of this - it is as if a truth which is unpalatable can simply be repackaged. I remember a woman around the 2010 election complaining on the news about how the results had not reflected her vote, and that had she been in a restaurant and been served chocolate cake when she had ordered cheesecake, something would be done about it. Have we become so self-absorbed that we can no longer accept a majority decision, or, far worse, a compromise? D'Ancona suggests that the American election result, and by extension the Brexit result, was the product of a disenfranchised, disillusioned populace sending the biggest 'F***k You' to their government in history. How have we got to the point where people are so willing to go against the facts and hurt their own prospects out of such pointless spite? Have we become such children that we sigh heavily during the boring facts about how far Britain's GDP will dip under Brexit and that most households will be around £300 worse off per year, and just giggle away at funny Mr Farage with his pint? Has our attention span become so microscopic?
Still, anyone could write a searing take-down of reasons why truth, facts and indeed reality have come under threat. What makes D'Ancona's book worth reading is that it is not just an analysis of the situation, but also an attempt to offer a solution. Post Truth is a piece of political advocacy, independent of specific political affiliation, with the final chapter entitled 'The Stench of Lies: Strategies to Defeat Post Truth'. I remember being struck back in my teaching days by the way in which children struggled to discern the differences between reliable and unreliable sources on the Internet. On one particular occasion, an ICT lesson returned three different answers for the question 'When was Churchill born?' As D'Ancona explains, this needs to be a key part of education. He points out that we save time in that answers can be found in our fingertips whereas for most of my school days I had to trawl through books. However, there is a balance to this - we need to add in time for fact-checking. This takes patience, but it needs to become embedded, with D'Ancona rightly observing, 'Learning how to navigate the web with discernment is the most pressing cultural missing of our age'.
Ending with 'Reasons to be Cheerful', Post Truth is an upbeat read, reminding us that all is not lost and trying to point out areas of recovery. Kellyanne Conway's exhortation to believe in 'alternative facts' sent Nineteen Eighty Four rocketing up the bestseller lists. Satire too can expose weakness and raise awareness. Deborah Lipstadt did not lose her case against David Irving and the recent film Denial reignites that point. There are 'science' celebrities such as Professor Brian Cox who can help make facts 'sexy' again (if they ever were). Still, I came away feeling afraid, fretting over the ever shrinking news cycle and goldfish memory that the media seems to assume we have - if they have to get the story out before we lose interest, there is no time for 'research' and due diligence, which leaves us with something that feels true but may not be. Post truth.
May 28, 2017
After three books were published on our post-truth world in the same week, I picked this one. Written by a political commentator I have a lot of time for, it was also the shortest. d'Ancona gives a well-written survey of post-truth, using Trump and Brexit as its dystopian consequences, before pointing the finger at its progenitors: conspiracy theorists, climate and vaccine sceptics, holocaust deniers, and then weirdly, post-modern philosophers.
Elsewhere, he describes the philosophers' purpose as being "cultural scouts." Whatever issues you may have with postmodernism (I have some) surely these philosophers were doing their job, albeit by d’Ancona’s somewhat reductive interpretation? That isn't to say that postmodern thinkers didn't have a hand in shaping the current cultural milieu, they certainly did, but the link between Trump's success and the writings of Baudrillard et al is extremely tenuous and unconvincing.
There is however a glaring omission in this blame game for who is accountable for the contemporary corruption of truth. A well-respected broadsheet political commentator, d'Anaona fails to properly take the mainstream media (MSM) to task for the part it has played, only briefly mentioning the Levison inquiry and the 24-hour onslaught of bile that is Fox News (tellingly, Andy Coulson appears in the Acknowledgements). Instead he argues that the decline of the MSM been to the detriment of our understanding of the truth, with social media-based fake news filling the vacuum it has left behind. Perhaps, but you could also argue that the truth-twisting, politically-bought, and generally nasty agenda of tabloid (and sometimes not so tabloid) journalism laid out a blueprint for the bare-faced lies we encounter today. D’Ancona seems unwilling for journalism to take its share of the responsibility for damaging our respect for truth and instead portrays it as the truth-telling paragon of yore. In doing so, he writes a weaker book, that doesn’t lead by example in telling the whole truth.
Elsewhere, he describes the philosophers' purpose as being "cultural scouts." Whatever issues you may have with postmodernism (I have some) surely these philosophers were doing their job, albeit by d’Ancona’s somewhat reductive interpretation? That isn't to say that postmodern thinkers didn't have a hand in shaping the current cultural milieu, they certainly did, but the link between Trump's success and the writings of Baudrillard et al is extremely tenuous and unconvincing.
There is however a glaring omission in this blame game for who is accountable for the contemporary corruption of truth. A well-respected broadsheet political commentator, d'Anaona fails to properly take the mainstream media (MSM) to task for the part it has played, only briefly mentioning the Levison inquiry and the 24-hour onslaught of bile that is Fox News (tellingly, Andy Coulson appears in the Acknowledgements). Instead he argues that the decline of the MSM been to the detriment of our understanding of the truth, with social media-based fake news filling the vacuum it has left behind. Perhaps, but you could also argue that the truth-twisting, politically-bought, and generally nasty agenda of tabloid (and sometimes not so tabloid) journalism laid out a blueprint for the bare-faced lies we encounter today. D’Ancona seems unwilling for journalism to take its share of the responsibility for damaging our respect for truth and instead portrays it as the truth-telling paragon of yore. In doing so, he writes a weaker book, that doesn’t lead by example in telling the whole truth.
September 18, 2017
This had me shook. The opening prologue was haunting enough when it discussed the way that the whole of history is basically filtered through a lens depending on the course it has taken.
D'Ancona's book looked at the term Post-Truth in light of Trump's presidency and the tidal wave of fake news and alternative facts. He discusses how feeling has begun to override fact in a disturbing 180-degree turn from the rationalism of the Enlightenment era. Almost every sentence in this book made me uncomfortable (not because of the writing, it was brilliantly researched), just because of how much we take the truth for granted and don't realise it.
There is also good discussion of postmodernism in terms of the idea of truth which I found incredibly interesting. I would recommend this if you are interested in social media and fake news scandals.
D'Ancona's book looked at the term Post-Truth in light of Trump's presidency and the tidal wave of fake news and alternative facts. He discusses how feeling has begun to override fact in a disturbing 180-degree turn from the rationalism of the Enlightenment era. Almost every sentence in this book made me uncomfortable (not because of the writing, it was brilliantly researched), just because of how much we take the truth for granted and don't realise it.
There is also good discussion of postmodernism in terms of the idea of truth which I found incredibly interesting. I would recommend this if you are interested in social media and fake news scandals.
September 3, 2017
A clarion call to open our eyes and minds, not merely to document and tut in irritated annoyance at the way truth and reality are continuously being distorted as politics has become reduced to mere entertainment, but to become actively engaged in sifting the truth from the lies and propaganda and insisting that this matters. In a world where sometimes it seems that we are all more interested in what goes on on our little phone screens that in the real world around us and in the sensations and thrills this pseudo world can provide Ancona encourages us to actively re-engage in citizenship and community and the political and social vigilance that accompanies this as the powerful antidote to post truth.
Ancona reminds us of Orwell's words at the end of 1984. "The moral to be drawn from this dangerous nightmare situation is a simple one. Don't let it happen. It depends on you."
Ancona reminds us of Orwell's words at the end of 1984. "The moral to be drawn from this dangerous nightmare situation is a simple one. Don't let it happen. It depends on you."
June 29, 2017
I have gone back and forth for the last week thinking about what rating I would give this book. On the one hand, a four because it is a book flagging an important issue of the moment that we should all be vividly aware of, no matter which end of the political spectrum we identify with; but a three because the title and the publisher’s description led me to think that the book would be more instructive in ‘the ways to fight back’ than it actually is.
The book is well-written, clearly explaining its thesis. It reads like a very long political feature article, with the effect that it is accessible and easily consumed. The book illustrates where we find ourselves, some of the history that has got us here, and why we should all be concerned. The book goes on to say that we should do something about it, that it is our intellectual (and perhaps even moral) responsibility to act in defiance to information that contains emotive hooks but little or no factual evidence. I agree.
However, the final chapter, which is where this book states itself as a manifesto and call to arms, contains little more than a reinforcement of the arguments stated in the previous chapters while pointing out that what makes ‘fake news’ and ‘alternative facts’ so compelling are their emotional hooks and a suggestion that in our attempts to give a voice back to truth based on hard facts we should make sure we present them in a way that appeals on this compelling emotional level; facts should be presented in such a way that a non-expert can understand the resulting impact and why it should matter to them. This may be all that is needed to be said if your audience are people from the media industries and industries that routinely output information for mass consumption, but what about the ‘normal’ person who is seeking a way to tackle misinformation on a daily basis? The only advice offered is to independently verify facts for yourself before taking them as truth. But what if you are an ordinary person who already does this, who already employs critical thinking in all areas of your life? If this book is to truly be a call to action, it needs to equip ordinary individuals in how they can directly tackle and dilute fake facts, disarming them, reducing their power to become the new truth. I found this information to be lacking, which was disappointing as this was my primary interest in the book. (Or perhaps I simply misunderstood what was written.)
That said, I maintain the idea that this is an important book to read, if only to provoke debate and self-interrogation in search of everyday means to neutralise the growing trend of a select few deciding what is truth, even in the face of the facts that should (but no longer seem to) show that the truth lies somewhere else.
Thank you to Ebury Publishing, Penguin Random House, and Netgalley for providing me with an advance e-book of this book in exchange for an honest review.
The book is well-written, clearly explaining its thesis. It reads like a very long political feature article, with the effect that it is accessible and easily consumed. The book illustrates where we find ourselves, some of the history that has got us here, and why we should all be concerned. The book goes on to say that we should do something about it, that it is our intellectual (and perhaps even moral) responsibility to act in defiance to information that contains emotive hooks but little or no factual evidence. I agree.
However, the final chapter, which is where this book states itself as a manifesto and call to arms, contains little more than a reinforcement of the arguments stated in the previous chapters while pointing out that what makes ‘fake news’ and ‘alternative facts’ so compelling are their emotional hooks and a suggestion that in our attempts to give a voice back to truth based on hard facts we should make sure we present them in a way that appeals on this compelling emotional level; facts should be presented in such a way that a non-expert can understand the resulting impact and why it should matter to them. This may be all that is needed to be said if your audience are people from the media industries and industries that routinely output information for mass consumption, but what about the ‘normal’ person who is seeking a way to tackle misinformation on a daily basis? The only advice offered is to independently verify facts for yourself before taking them as truth. But what if you are an ordinary person who already does this, who already employs critical thinking in all areas of your life? If this book is to truly be a call to action, it needs to equip ordinary individuals in how they can directly tackle and dilute fake facts, disarming them, reducing their power to become the new truth. I found this information to be lacking, which was disappointing as this was my primary interest in the book. (Or perhaps I simply misunderstood what was written.)
That said, I maintain the idea that this is an important book to read, if only to provoke debate and self-interrogation in search of everyday means to neutralise the growing trend of a select few deciding what is truth, even in the face of the facts that should (but no longer seem to) show that the truth lies somewhere else.
Thank you to Ebury Publishing, Penguin Random House, and Netgalley for providing me with an advance e-book of this book in exchange for an honest review.
May 28, 2017
I received this book from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review
Your political viewpoint will absolutely effect how you feel about this book.
Personally, I have always found it shocking that so many people expect politicians to lie. Every conversation I have had at work about the upcoming UK general election has revolved around 'well they all tell lies anyway' and it makes me really sad that politics has come into this horrific era of 'fake news' and 'alternative facts'.
This is a well written, seemingly well researched collection of essays surrounding this weird age we are currently in and I enjoyed reading it.
There is an incredibly interesting piece on how social media and technology in general has led to Holocaust denial and antisemitism being far more normalised.
I read this in relation to Brexit, which I voted against and still very much wish wasn't happening, and it was very relevant. There is a section talking about how facts aren't enough in politics any more and that couldn't be more accurate. I still can't stop thinking about that stupid bus claiming that £350million a week would be going to the NHS and the fact that their budget has since been cut.
This book of essays is enlightening, academically researched and incredibly timely. I would definitely recommend it to anyone interested in politics and think it would be a good starting point for people who want to become more involved but don't really understand it.
Your political viewpoint will absolutely effect how you feel about this book.
Personally, I have always found it shocking that so many people expect politicians to lie. Every conversation I have had at work about the upcoming UK general election has revolved around 'well they all tell lies anyway' and it makes me really sad that politics has come into this horrific era of 'fake news' and 'alternative facts'.
This is a well written, seemingly well researched collection of essays surrounding this weird age we are currently in and I enjoyed reading it.
There is an incredibly interesting piece on how social media and technology in general has led to Holocaust denial and antisemitism being far more normalised.
I read this in relation to Brexit, which I voted against and still very much wish wasn't happening, and it was very relevant. There is a section talking about how facts aren't enough in politics any more and that couldn't be more accurate. I still can't stop thinking about that stupid bus claiming that £350million a week would be going to the NHS and the fact that their budget has since been cut.
This book of essays is enlightening, academically researched and incredibly timely. I would definitely recommend it to anyone interested in politics and think it would be a good starting point for people who want to become more involved but don't really understand it.
September 7, 2022
La verdad es que la manera que tiene este autor de explicar los mecanismos de desinformación que utiliza la ultraderecha, usando ejemplos reales, hace que está lectura, además de ayudar a entender cómo funcionan estás tácticas, hace que sea una lectura amena y nada enfarragosa. Recomiendo fervientemente este libro a todo aquel que quiera saber sobre este tema
September 1, 2017
This short book explained the post-truth world we are in right now. It used to be that we all have our opinions, but only 1 truth. Now, there are only opinions. Fake news, denials, conspiracy theories and the death of expertise (all experts are tainted) are the gist of modern post truth world.
However, the author offered hopeful ways for us to fight back. Social media giants are now developing tools to detect fake news and click-baits. In the end, the buck stops with us. We must resist the same tendency to behave like the Post Truthers: we must verify, and verfiy.
However, the author offered hopeful ways for us to fight back. Social media giants are now developing tools to detect fake news and click-baits. In the end, the buck stops with us. We must resist the same tendency to behave like the Post Truthers: we must verify, and verfiy.
June 6, 2017
originally posted on HellyReads
Oh my goodness. This was so depressing yet so interesting all at the same time. It goes into great detail about how facts and the truth no longer matter in the court of public opinion and politics, and how interpretations are way more important.
Points are made that although the election of Donald Trump, and the Brexit vote have happened, they aren't the cause of the post-truth era, merely a symptom.
It is extremely well researched, written and explained. It is also frankly terrifying. The final chapter discusses what we can do in order to make the truth matter again, but the fact that we have to do anything is the scary part.
I was reading this at the same time as The Destruction of Hillary Clinton, and the two books combined made some of the same points, scaring me and angering me in equal measures!
I used to have a pretty strong aversion to non-fiction books, but it seems that I have a developing fondness for political discussions - maybe because I love to shout at the TV when there are political programmes on!
I highly recommend this to anyone who is wondering how the heck the world has ended up in the political state it is in.
Received via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
Oh my goodness. This was so depressing yet so interesting all at the same time. It goes into great detail about how facts and the truth no longer matter in the court of public opinion and politics, and how interpretations are way more important.
Points are made that although the election of Donald Trump, and the Brexit vote have happened, they aren't the cause of the post-truth era, merely a symptom.
It is extremely well researched, written and explained. It is also frankly terrifying. The final chapter discusses what we can do in order to make the truth matter again, but the fact that we have to do anything is the scary part.
I was reading this at the same time as The Destruction of Hillary Clinton, and the two books combined made some of the same points, scaring me and angering me in equal measures!
I used to have a pretty strong aversion to non-fiction books, but it seems that I have a developing fondness for political discussions - maybe because I love to shout at the TV when there are political programmes on!
I highly recommend this to anyone who is wondering how the heck the world has ended up in the political state it is in.
Received via Netgalley in exchange for an honest review.
June 18, 2017
A very good summary. I felt like there were some strands I'd like to see developed further, such as the use of "political correctness" as a crowbar to pry open any attempt to work towards a more progressive notion of , and it was a little fuzzy on the diference between ordinary, bogstandard lies and the more Trumpian hostility to the idea that there's an objective truth that can be discovered, that matters, that can challenge the exercise of power. It was stated but didn't always seem to be i view in the examples given.
But quibbles aside, it was a good survey of the current state of play and the struggles that face people of goodwill in an age when facts are seen as of marginal interest.
But quibbles aside, it was a good survey of the current state of play and the struggles that face people of goodwill in an age when facts are seen as of marginal interest.
June 21, 2017
A pretty fascinating study into why so many people no longer care about truth. The book leans heavily on the catastrophic decisions made by British and American people in 2016 to vote for Brexit and elect Donald Trump, but digs well beyond that to the psychology of why we prefer hollow phrases that inspire emotion rather than actual truth.
June 5, 2017
A succinct, yet excellent overview of one the biggest threats to modern democracy.
"a system free of the distorting forces that lead inexorably to tyranny [...] is only as strong as those who protect it"
"a system free of the distorting forces that lead inexorably to tyranny [...] is only as strong as those who protect it"
October 20, 2018
This is an astonishing, and necessary, book. Matthew d'Ancona deploys his brilliant journalistic skills in researching and examining the current "post-truth" phenomenon that has been identified within such political rumblings as the recent Brexit vote in the UK as well as the election of President Trump in the U.S. It is a frank, and wide-ranging analysis of all the many ways this rejection of the truth and facts manifests beyond such political occurrences, building up a case study for how such events were allowed to take place. I enjoyed d'Ancona's use of a cultural lens, an angle I didn't think to examine when looking into post-truth, and was left suitably harrowed by all his many instances of the way, historically, we have come to eschew truth in favour of a narrative that suits our biases. What I enjoyed most about this, was d'Ancona's parity: whilst he cannot invariably overlook Trump and Brexit, and the way his work takes a slighting view of both, his work remains academic and encourages us to incorporate an understanding of facts and think beyond social media outlets, and their use of soundbite, rather than towards a particular political party. d'Ancona's writing style is precise and definite, a refreshing turn away from the usual pithy statements used in soundbite and major tabloids, and his content remains focused and informative throughout. Although his examination of what is a wide-spread mentality is concerning, I appreciated his final optimism and the time he took to lay out our options moving forwards when it comes to combating the issues that are intrinsically wrapped up in these recent political revolutions.
May 15, 2017
In November 2012, Mark Thompson, the former Director General of the BBC, delivered, as part of his Humanitas Visiting Professorship in Rhetoric and the Art of Public Persuasion at Oxford University, a series of three lectures there entitled ‘The Cloud of Unknowing’.
The theme of Thompson’s lectures was the degeneration of public discourse and particularly of political language in contemporary democratic politics, with the latter becoming more effective as an instrument of political persuasion but less effective as a medium of explanation and deliberation. To illustrate the way in which public language is increasingly prone to exaggeration and paranoia, Thompson examined in some detail Sarah Palin’s reference to Obamacare’s alleged ‘death panels’ (which d’Ancona also references). Thompson’s insights (later worked up into his 2016 book ‘Enough Said. What’s Gone Wrong with the Language of Politics’) were extremely prescient.
Since 2012, the phenomenon of post-truth expression, and particularly Fake News, has become a mainstream concern given the misrepresentations of the EU referendum campaign and, above all, the election of Trump as 45th President of the United States. There has accordingly been a flurry of books on the subject.
Matthew d’Ancona’s ‘Post-Truth’ is part of that trend but he, like Thompson, views the perversion of public discourse in its fullest context considering, like Thompson in his original lectures, topics such as the disavowal of climate change science, and he is also, like Thompson, not content merely to analyze what has happened but goes on to suggest ways in which the situation might be retrieved, d’Ancona’s book being subtitled ‘The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back’. Incidentally, whilst d’Ancona’s fairly brief book is amply footnoted it does not contain a bibliography, and there is no reference anywhere in the text to Mark Thompson’s pioneering work.
D’Ancona’s mission is threefold: to expose the roots of our Post-Truth era; to diagnose its symptoms; and to offer a cure.
When tracing the origins of the Post-Truth era d’Ancona ranges broadly, examining the post-modernists’ corrosion of the notion of objective reality, the role of the internet and the erosion of trust in a variety of institutions as a result of events including the 2008 banking crisis, the 2009 parliamentary expenses scandal, the revelations regarding Jimmy Savile, and the hacking controversy. A more comprehensive account could also have included references to the findings of the Saville, Chilcot and Hillsborough inquiries, or at least to the doubts which were ultimately vindicated by their reports.
These are not d’Ancona’s only omissions. The EU referendum and Trump’s election but not Corbyn’s election as Labour leader are presented as marking “an uprising against the established order and a demand for ill-defined change” which “overturned the blithe predictions of pundits, pollsters and bookies”, and we’re told that the Leave campaign “triumphed with slogans that were demonstrably untrue or misleading” whilst no mention is made of George Osborne’s “punishment Budget” or “DIY recession”. In addition, if d’Ancona wanted to trace popular disenchantment with the predictive power of experts he should have mentioned their dire but unfulfilled prognostications regarding the Y2K or Millennium bug.
D’Ancona realizes that Trump is a symptom rather the cause of Post-Truth but still manages to skewer his serial mendacity with all the delight of a lepidopterist pinning some particularly prized possession. Thus Trump is “a soiled Gatsby” with a talent for emotional narrative, who is essentially an entertainer, who has successfully “recast the presidency as the most desirable role in show business.”
Rather than making Donald Trump or Alexander Dugin or Nigel Farage his chief villain, d’Ancona somewhat surprisingly casts Sigmund Freud in that role, on the grounds that the paradigm of therapy, which prizes emotional sincerity above forensically established objective fact, “has spread far beyond” its original “clinical setting, to assume a dominant role in contemporary culture and mores.”
I seriously doubt whether Freudianism has percolated through society as fully as d’Ancona imagines. I would suggest, for example, that however much many of those who supported Brexit or voted for Trump may be willing to blame immigrants for society’s ills they will always hold an individual to blame if faced with a choice between doing that or blaming that individual’s parents or society at large.
D’Ancona suggestions for defending respect for the truth against the “plutocratic, political and algorithmic firepower” of the Post-Truth stakeholders are varied and plausible and his call to the barricades genuinely rousing, although his faith in satirists to “act as picadors in the fight against Post-Truth” is almost certainly over optimistic. As Peter Cook was fond of pointing out, Weimar Berlin had the world’s most sophisticated political cabaret but that did nothing to stem the rising tide of fascism.
In the final analysis, setting aside all the shortcomings outlined above, this is a well-written, wide-ranging, informative and thought-provoking book which will be very appealing to those who share its author’s wish “to defend Enlightenment values.” I just wonder if, considering the persistence of religious values, the advent of ersatz religions such as Marxism and fascism and of pseudo-sciences like Freudianism, or even the enormous popularity of activities like gambling, rationalism has ever been quite as firmly entrenched as he assumes.
The theme of Thompson’s lectures was the degeneration of public discourse and particularly of political language in contemporary democratic politics, with the latter becoming more effective as an instrument of political persuasion but less effective as a medium of explanation and deliberation. To illustrate the way in which public language is increasingly prone to exaggeration and paranoia, Thompson examined in some detail Sarah Palin’s reference to Obamacare’s alleged ‘death panels’ (which d’Ancona also references). Thompson’s insights (later worked up into his 2016 book ‘Enough Said. What’s Gone Wrong with the Language of Politics’) were extremely prescient.
Since 2012, the phenomenon of post-truth expression, and particularly Fake News, has become a mainstream concern given the misrepresentations of the EU referendum campaign and, above all, the election of Trump as 45th President of the United States. There has accordingly been a flurry of books on the subject.
Matthew d’Ancona’s ‘Post-Truth’ is part of that trend but he, like Thompson, views the perversion of public discourse in its fullest context considering, like Thompson in his original lectures, topics such as the disavowal of climate change science, and he is also, like Thompson, not content merely to analyze what has happened but goes on to suggest ways in which the situation might be retrieved, d’Ancona’s book being subtitled ‘The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back’. Incidentally, whilst d’Ancona’s fairly brief book is amply footnoted it does not contain a bibliography, and there is no reference anywhere in the text to Mark Thompson’s pioneering work.
D’Ancona’s mission is threefold: to expose the roots of our Post-Truth era; to diagnose its symptoms; and to offer a cure.
When tracing the origins of the Post-Truth era d’Ancona ranges broadly, examining the post-modernists’ corrosion of the notion of objective reality, the role of the internet and the erosion of trust in a variety of institutions as a result of events including the 2008 banking crisis, the 2009 parliamentary expenses scandal, the revelations regarding Jimmy Savile, and the hacking controversy. A more comprehensive account could also have included references to the findings of the Saville, Chilcot and Hillsborough inquiries, or at least to the doubts which were ultimately vindicated by their reports.
These are not d’Ancona’s only omissions. The EU referendum and Trump’s election but not Corbyn’s election as Labour leader are presented as marking “an uprising against the established order and a demand for ill-defined change” which “overturned the blithe predictions of pundits, pollsters and bookies”, and we’re told that the Leave campaign “triumphed with slogans that were demonstrably untrue or misleading” whilst no mention is made of George Osborne’s “punishment Budget” or “DIY recession”. In addition, if d’Ancona wanted to trace popular disenchantment with the predictive power of experts he should have mentioned their dire but unfulfilled prognostications regarding the Y2K or Millennium bug.
D’Ancona realizes that Trump is a symptom rather the cause of Post-Truth but still manages to skewer his serial mendacity with all the delight of a lepidopterist pinning some particularly prized possession. Thus Trump is “a soiled Gatsby” with a talent for emotional narrative, who is essentially an entertainer, who has successfully “recast the presidency as the most desirable role in show business.”
Rather than making Donald Trump or Alexander Dugin or Nigel Farage his chief villain, d’Ancona somewhat surprisingly casts Sigmund Freud in that role, on the grounds that the paradigm of therapy, which prizes emotional sincerity above forensically established objective fact, “has spread far beyond” its original “clinical setting, to assume a dominant role in contemporary culture and mores.”
I seriously doubt whether Freudianism has percolated through society as fully as d’Ancona imagines. I would suggest, for example, that however much many of those who supported Brexit or voted for Trump may be willing to blame immigrants for society’s ills they will always hold an individual to blame if faced with a choice between doing that or blaming that individual’s parents or society at large.
D’Ancona suggestions for defending respect for the truth against the “plutocratic, political and algorithmic firepower” of the Post-Truth stakeholders are varied and plausible and his call to the barricades genuinely rousing, although his faith in satirists to “act as picadors in the fight against Post-Truth” is almost certainly over optimistic. As Peter Cook was fond of pointing out, Weimar Berlin had the world’s most sophisticated political cabaret but that did nothing to stem the rising tide of fascism.
In the final analysis, setting aside all the shortcomings outlined above, this is a well-written, wide-ranging, informative and thought-provoking book which will be very appealing to those who share its author’s wish “to defend Enlightenment values.” I just wonder if, considering the persistence of religious values, the advent of ersatz religions such as Marxism and fascism and of pseudo-sciences like Freudianism, or even the enormous popularity of activities like gambling, rationalism has ever been quite as firmly entrenched as he assumes.
March 7, 2020
Un libro muy actual, de lectura ágil y amena sobre un tema complejo y escabroso como lo es la posverdad.
El autor desarrolla una propuesta a partir de acontecimientos recientes que están modificando drásticamente las relaciones políticas, económicas y sociales a escala mundial: la llegada de Trump a la presidencia de los EEUU, el Brexit, los movimientos antivacunas, los terraplanistas, los negacionistas del calentamiento global, los "alternative facts" que sostienen intereses al margen de los hechos, las estadísticas y el pensamiento científico, pero que a fin de cuentas ejercen mayor adherencia en las sociedades actuales por su alto contenido emocional que reafirma cada identidad tribal...
Está claro que el contexto del autor es anglosajón, esa es la única limitante que sentí del texto, porque acá donde vivo (Latinoamerica) la posverdad está haciendo estragos sin que nada la detenga, y desearía un libro así que hable del contexto latinoamericano.
El autor desarrolla una propuesta a partir de acontecimientos recientes que están modificando drásticamente las relaciones políticas, económicas y sociales a escala mundial: la llegada de Trump a la presidencia de los EEUU, el Brexit, los movimientos antivacunas, los terraplanistas, los negacionistas del calentamiento global, los "alternative facts" que sostienen intereses al margen de los hechos, las estadísticas y el pensamiento científico, pero que a fin de cuentas ejercen mayor adherencia en las sociedades actuales por su alto contenido emocional que reafirma cada identidad tribal...
Está claro que el contexto del autor es anglosajón, esa es la única limitante que sentí del texto, porque acá donde vivo (Latinoamerica) la posverdad está haciendo estragos sin que nada la detenga, y desearía un libro así que hable del contexto latinoamericano.
June 27, 2017
This book is both eye-opening and slightly terrifying. Matthew d'Ancona brings to the forefront the issue of post-truth and explains it in such a way that makes it impossible to ignore. We live in the post-truth era. Read this book and find out why.
In 2016 the Oxford English Dictionary picked Post-Truth as its word of the year, which is defined as 'circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief'.
In the same week as this book was published two other books were published, both of them were also entitled 'Post-Truth'. One of them was by an author called Evan Davis and the other was by an author called James Ball. It seems like more than a coincidence that three books with the same subject focus would be published in exactly the same week. If anything it shows just how prevalent this idea of 'post-truth' is in our world today. Matthew d'Ancona, unlike the other authors, puts the very specific date of 2016 on the start of this phenomenon of Post-Truth arguing that it "was the year that definitively launched the era of ‘Post-Truth"
One of the things that I loved about this book is that Matthew doesn't just give the reader a definition and explanation of what 'post-truth' is, he sets out from the very beginning past and current events that can be seen to be a result of this feeling of 'post-truth' such as the Brexit vote and Donald Trump's presidential race and election.
d'Ancona argues that this post-truth era that we are now living in has come about, fundamentally, because of a lack of trust in traditional institutions. The 'people don't vote because they actually believe the politicians can fulfil what they promise. All politicians lie anyway' idea. This feeling, d'Ancona argues, has come from failing after failing. From the economic collapse in 2008, to the political expenses scandal in 2009 and so on (and that is only in Britain). Living in a world of complete uncertainty has meant that the value of truth has dropped to rock-bottom prices.
On top of these failings the explosion of the digital age has accentuated this lack of trust and has aggravated the idea of 'post-truth'. Fake news, statistics with no basis, empty promises. All of these are symptoms of the post-truth world that we live in and have come to hold more value than the truth that is hidden behind them. d'Ancona sums this up very well when he says "it is a common error to confuse data with truth: the former informs the latter, but they are not the same thing". People put more trust in data (which is often inaccurate or missing vital pieces of information) rather than in the truth itself. It is easier to ridicule someone to destroy their reputation than it is to genuinely bury them with the truth.
Ultimately this book is more of a diagnosis of the problem, an eye-opener for the people, rather than a finger pointer at who is to blame, because the fact is that no one person is to blame for this era that we are moving into. A combination of ingredients has led to this shift in outlook that the world is seeing today. What d'Ancona does call for is action from the people to recognise that the final straw that will lead to complete acceptance of this idea of post-truth (if it hasn't already taken place) is for the people to blindly accept everything that is put in front of them, whether they are lies, truth or something in between. The only solution is to seek truth amongst everything we are bombarded with on a daily basis. Of course there is an argument that a few post-modernists have presented. If a lie is told enough times, eventually it becomes the truth. Just something to think about.
In 2016 the Oxford English Dictionary picked Post-Truth as its word of the year, which is defined as 'circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief'.
In the same week as this book was published two other books were published, both of them were also entitled 'Post-Truth'. One of them was by an author called Evan Davis and the other was by an author called James Ball. It seems like more than a coincidence that three books with the same subject focus would be published in exactly the same week. If anything it shows just how prevalent this idea of 'post-truth' is in our world today. Matthew d'Ancona, unlike the other authors, puts the very specific date of 2016 on the start of this phenomenon of Post-Truth arguing that it "was the year that definitively launched the era of ‘Post-Truth"
One of the things that I loved about this book is that Matthew doesn't just give the reader a definition and explanation of what 'post-truth' is, he sets out from the very beginning past and current events that can be seen to be a result of this feeling of 'post-truth' such as the Brexit vote and Donald Trump's presidential race and election.
d'Ancona argues that this post-truth era that we are now living in has come about, fundamentally, because of a lack of trust in traditional institutions. The 'people don't vote because they actually believe the politicians can fulfil what they promise. All politicians lie anyway' idea. This feeling, d'Ancona argues, has come from failing after failing. From the economic collapse in 2008, to the political expenses scandal in 2009 and so on (and that is only in Britain). Living in a world of complete uncertainty has meant that the value of truth has dropped to rock-bottom prices.
On top of these failings the explosion of the digital age has accentuated this lack of trust and has aggravated the idea of 'post-truth'. Fake news, statistics with no basis, empty promises. All of these are symptoms of the post-truth world that we live in and have come to hold more value than the truth that is hidden behind them. d'Ancona sums this up very well when he says "it is a common error to confuse data with truth: the former informs the latter, but they are not the same thing". People put more trust in data (which is often inaccurate or missing vital pieces of information) rather than in the truth itself. It is easier to ridicule someone to destroy their reputation than it is to genuinely bury them with the truth.
Ultimately this book is more of a diagnosis of the problem, an eye-opener for the people, rather than a finger pointer at who is to blame, because the fact is that no one person is to blame for this era that we are moving into. A combination of ingredients has led to this shift in outlook that the world is seeing today. What d'Ancona does call for is action from the people to recognise that the final straw that will lead to complete acceptance of this idea of post-truth (if it hasn't already taken place) is for the people to blindly accept everything that is put in front of them, whether they are lies, truth or something in between. The only solution is to seek truth amongst everything we are bombarded with on a daily basis. Of course there is an argument that a few post-modernists have presented. If a lie is told enough times, eventually it becomes the truth. Just something to think about.
May 28, 2022
As is often the case with these kinds of books, it's excellent in its analysis of what's happening but far weaker in how we can fight back. To his credit, d'Ancona does at least try to make some suggestions but the focus is on 'it's up to us as citizens' rather than telling us how we 'as citizens' can actually make a difference. Holds up very well given it was written half a decade ago now.
November 25, 2024
Un saggio piuttosto breve e semplice sul concetto di post verità. Risulta tristemente datato anche se è stato pubblicato nel 2017 perché gli ultimi 7 anni sono stati una follia sociopolitica. Molto America-centrico.
Non sono rimasta particolarmente impressionata ma ho studiato queste cose per anni all’università quindi è sicuramente per quello
Non sono rimasta particolarmente impressionata ma ho studiato queste cose per anni all’università quindi è sicuramente per quello
September 14, 2017
Review on my blog tomorrow.
September 28, 2021
Bom livro, mas a parte sobre filosofia pós-moderna é mais do que questionável.
May 7, 2022
Interesting and at times inspiring read. My issue with this book is it's inaccessibility, the language used at times is uneccessarily complex and it's a shame because it makes it a chore to get through.
June 28, 2017
Matthew D’Ancona’s Post-Truth is a brilliant assessment of our world today. He analyses the concept of post-truth and the circumstances through which it came to dominate – arguing that Trump is a symptom of post-truth not a cause of it. He looks at how post-truth affects our society today in the form of fake news, conspiracy theories, and the devaluation of science and truth. He explains how people can be presented with incontrovertible proof that something is untrue but the conspiracy theories they have allied themselves with allow them to force causation and meaning onto an event – this is more comforting to them than the cold facts that leave them fearing a world where bad things just happen. If they can find someone or something (the government, big pharma) to blame then they feel more secure. He helps makes sense of the phenomenon so that we can arm ourselves against it.
This is quite a chilling read but it is fascinating and hugely relevant. It does offer up some hope too. The subhead of the book is very important - ‘The war on truth and how to fight back’ – because D’Ancona gives guidance for how ordinary people can resist and fight back against this situation. He aims to provide us with the tools to fight back – encouraging the reader to be their own fact checker, to check whether a story comes from a legitimate source, to use fact-checking websites. Well worth a read.
This is quite a chilling read but it is fascinating and hugely relevant. It does offer up some hope too. The subhead of the book is very important - ‘The war on truth and how to fight back’ – because D’Ancona gives guidance for how ordinary people can resist and fight back against this situation. He aims to provide us with the tools to fight back – encouraging the reader to be their own fact checker, to check whether a story comes from a legitimate source, to use fact-checking websites. Well worth a read.
July 13, 2017
In his text on the post-truth era, Matthew d’Ancona sums up post-truth politics as “the triumph of the visceral over the rational, the deceptively simple over the honestly complex”. It’s a sage and timely piece, reflecting primarily on Brexit and the rise of Trump, but also the movement’s historical background, psychology, and how we can combat it.
Throughout the well-researched and compelling text were little tidbits that really tickled me, such as the fact that George Washington never actually said “I cannot tell a lie” - this was an invention by biographer Mason Weems, who in turn claimed to be the rector of a fictitious church(!). Less tickling but just as surprising was the revelation that in China, “state-sponsored commenters - millions of them - fabricate about 448 social media posts a year.” That really put some perspective on fake news for me.
As other reviews have noted, journalist d’Ancona gives the press an easy ride in their role in this new political landscape. There were places, I’ll admit - especially amongst the historical philosophising - that it started to go a bit over my head. Still, Post-Truth is an interesting, if not easily-digestible, read, and provides a worthy overview.
Many thanks to Ebury Press at Penguin Random House UK for providing a free copy in exchange for an honest review via NetGalley.
[Review originally published on my blog at Line After Line.]
Throughout the well-researched and compelling text were little tidbits that really tickled me, such as the fact that George Washington never actually said “I cannot tell a lie” - this was an invention by biographer Mason Weems, who in turn claimed to be the rector of a fictitious church(!). Less tickling but just as surprising was the revelation that in China, “state-sponsored commenters - millions of them - fabricate about 448 social media posts a year.” That really put some perspective on fake news for me.
As other reviews have noted, journalist d’Ancona gives the press an easy ride in their role in this new political landscape. There were places, I’ll admit - especially amongst the historical philosophising - that it started to go a bit over my head. Still, Post-Truth is an interesting, if not easily-digestible, read, and provides a worthy overview.
Many thanks to Ebury Press at Penguin Random House UK for providing a free copy in exchange for an honest review via NetGalley.
[Review originally published on my blog at Line After Line.]
June 30, 2017
A fascinating and clever little book that throws light on the murky Post Truth world in which we live, from Trump's victory to Brexit, climate change deniers, anti vaxxers, advisers who bend lies and falsehoods into " alternative truths", this book has a powerful message that complacency on our part and maintaining the status quo leads to the political vacuum and lack of integrity and intellectual dishonesty that the political classes demonstrate every day. Some wonderful quotes from Orwell, Martin Luther King and Churchill illustrate the perils of doing nothing in the face of the onslaught on democracy that post truth represents. Even my favorite film, Apocalypse Now, and Captain Kurtz gets a mention. Recommended for anyone who is disenchanted with the state of the world and wants to know what can be done to turn things around.
June 9, 2017
As with all abstract notions, the answer to the question posed above could bring forth as many variants as there are offers: each to his own. A quick look on the web will tell you that ‘truth’ is ‘that which is commonly accepted as being true’, or ‘in accordance with fact or reality’: not much help there then! And herein lies the problem: based on those definitions there is no way that my truth is the same as your truth. Our experience of the world is filtered through our own unique experience of the world; so, my reality is different from yours. No surprise then that, for example, when asked by police to provide witness statements of the same crime scene, there are as many versions as there are witnesses. So, if there is a world out there, external to ourselves, and not just a mental construct created within the black box of our brains, discovering the ‘truth’ about it is an issue of epistemology rather than ontology.
The above should, of course, be perfectly obvious. Otherwise the world would be a totally boring place full of automaton-like Stepford inhabitants, never disagreeing. However, there are a few things we should all be able to agree are true: e.g. one and one make two. But, we live in an uncertain world! d’Ancona traces the development of our existential woes, from the replacement of Newtonian science’s world view that guaranteed certainty and predictability by the chance and randomness of Quantum Theory, right up to the global public’s disenchantment with the excesses of capitalism, in the form of ‘greedy bankers’, taxing-avoiding global corporations and governments grown distant from the cares and concerns of their respective electorates, to the advent of a rejection of all that supported that ruling elite; i.e. globalization, free markets and supranational mega deals. All of which have resulted in a desire to retreat into isolationism, protectionism and political chancers promising new Heavens and New Earths; appealing to those basic fears, in the most basic ways: a respect for truth, D’Ancona claims, has been one of the first victims.
Perhaps, it’s a question of hedging our bets. Perhaps, when asked the question; ‘are you telling the truth?’ we can only answer – like a weather forecaster; ‘well, based on the evidence at my disposal, there is a 71% chance of veracity’.
The truths are out there - somewhere: but be careful which you choose!
The above should, of course, be perfectly obvious. Otherwise the world would be a totally boring place full of automaton-like Stepford inhabitants, never disagreeing. However, there are a few things we should all be able to agree are true: e.g. one and one make two. But, we live in an uncertain world! d’Ancona traces the development of our existential woes, from the replacement of Newtonian science’s world view that guaranteed certainty and predictability by the chance and randomness of Quantum Theory, right up to the global public’s disenchantment with the excesses of capitalism, in the form of ‘greedy bankers’, taxing-avoiding global corporations and governments grown distant from the cares and concerns of their respective electorates, to the advent of a rejection of all that supported that ruling elite; i.e. globalization, free markets and supranational mega deals. All of which have resulted in a desire to retreat into isolationism, protectionism and political chancers promising new Heavens and New Earths; appealing to those basic fears, in the most basic ways: a respect for truth, D’Ancona claims, has been one of the first victims.
Perhaps, it’s a question of hedging our bets. Perhaps, when asked the question; ‘are you telling the truth?’ we can only answer – like a weather forecaster; ‘well, based on the evidence at my disposal, there is a 71% chance of veracity’.
The truths are out there - somewhere: but be careful which you choose!
June 22, 2017
Book supplied by Netgalley for an honest review.
Trump, for all his faults, is gold dust for the entertainment industry. He's petrol on the flames of satire, and the butt of countless books and articles that discuss every aspect of his erratic behaviour, from his handshake, to his wife's every flinch, and the subject of this book, the fact that his supporters don't care that he and his cohorts blatantly lie at every opportunity.
The preface of Matthew D'Ancona's Post-Truth sets the tone, patiently explaining the issues, then demanding a call to arms: "Are you content for the central values of the Enlightenment, of free societies and of democratic discourse, to be trashed by charlatans - or not? Are you on the pitch, or content to stay on the terrace?"
Post-Truth is more than simple populism, it's the bending of facts then the repeated denial of wrongdoing. It's no coincidence that sales of George Orwell's 1984 leapt after Trump's inauguration. And those who believe Post-Truth will end when he leaves office are, as D'Ancona said, "confusing the leaves of the weed with its roots".
Post-Truth can be traced from the end World War Two, through the rise (and decline) of post-modernism's cynicism, the invention of the internet, to the modern phenomenon of click-bait. This is an interesting read, expertly researched and impressively written. A must read.
Trump, for all his faults, is gold dust for the entertainment industry. He's petrol on the flames of satire, and the butt of countless books and articles that discuss every aspect of his erratic behaviour, from his handshake, to his wife's every flinch, and the subject of this book, the fact that his supporters don't care that he and his cohorts blatantly lie at every opportunity.
The preface of Matthew D'Ancona's Post-Truth sets the tone, patiently explaining the issues, then demanding a call to arms: "Are you content for the central values of the Enlightenment, of free societies and of democratic discourse, to be trashed by charlatans - or not? Are you on the pitch, or content to stay on the terrace?"
Post-Truth is more than simple populism, it's the bending of facts then the repeated denial of wrongdoing. It's no coincidence that sales of George Orwell's 1984 leapt after Trump's inauguration. And those who believe Post-Truth will end when he leaves office are, as D'Ancona said, "confusing the leaves of the weed with its roots".
Post-Truth can be traced from the end World War Two, through the rise (and decline) of post-modernism's cynicism, the invention of the internet, to the modern phenomenon of click-bait. This is an interesting read, expertly researched and impressively written. A must read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 116 reviews