Post-Truth: How Bullshit Conquered the World

by James Ball

2016 marked the birth of the post-truth era. Sophistry and spin have coloured politics since the dawn of time, but two shock events - the Brexit vote and Donald Trump's elevation to US President - heralded a departure into murkier territory.

From Trump denying video evidence of his own words, to the infamous Leave claims of £350 million for the NHS, politics has rarely seen so many stretching the truth with such impunity.

Bullshit gets you noticed. Bullshit makes you rich. Bullshit can even pave your way to the Oval Office.

This is bigger than fake news and bigger than social media. It's about the slow rise of a political, media and online infrastructure that has devalued truth.

This is the story of what's being spread, who's spreading it, why it works - and what we can do to tackle it.

Genres: Nonfiction, Politics, History, Sociology, Technology, Philosophy, Internet

306 pages, Kindle Edition

Published May 11, 2017

Reviews

[Imi · Rating 3 out of 5]

A mixed bag, which is a shame, because once Ball got to the core of his argument it was a good read. Mildy outdated already, of course, but that's just the nature of writing about current affairs, and I was sure it would be when starting the book. My main problem was that a large chunk of the book was yet another blow-by-blow account of both Trump's raise to power in the US and the triumph of the Leave campaign in the UK's Brexit referendum. I have two problems with this. Firstly, unless you've been living under a rock for the past few years, you've already heard this a million times over, and, secondly, focusing on these examples I think gives the false impression that misinformation or "bullshit", as Ball calls it, is unique to this time period in these two Western countries. I know this isn't what Ball is suggesting at all, as he says himself in the (better) later chapters, but then why put such a focus on these two examples? Why not compare and contrast different countries with different political systems at different time periods? This seemed like odd omission, and I think adding this would have given more depth to Ball's argument and would have got us closer to defining exactly what "bullshit" is and how it's come about. The strongest chapter, in my opinion, was chapter 9, called "Why we fall for it", which goes into concepts like "confirmation bias", the "backfire effect", "conformity", and other psychological and social reasons which go some way in explaining why groups and individuals are inclined to believe information from one source, while disregarding information from another. Fascinating stuff and an area I'd like to read more on in the future. Fortunately, Ball has provided a wonderful bibliography at the end of the book to get you started. So not a bad read overall, even if I skimmed some chapters.

[David Cross · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you have any interest in how people find, digest and share information through old media, new media (who remembers new media?) or social media, then you'll find this book as fascinating as I did.

And if you don't have any interest in that subject, then you really should.

[Steven S · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Narasi penting bagaimana omongkosong (telah) merajai dunia."

Setelah menghabiskan "Post-Truth" milik James Ball, praktis buku ini masuk salah satu buku favorit saya di 2017. Dari mana saya tahu buku ini? Saya melihatnya sepintas di postingan instagram Ignatius Haryanto, pemerhati media dan peneliti senior Lembaga Studi Pers dan Pembangunan (LSPP). Ketika kemarin melihat-lihat di Kino, buku bersampul dominan kuning ini langsung saya sambar di rak "studi politik". Isinya cukup mengesankan. Semua isu politik teraktual dibahas implikasinya di sepanjang buku ini. Intinya James Ball mencoba menerangkan bagaimana situasi "berita bohong" atau yang sering kita kenali dengan hoax bisa mewabah di masyarakat.

Berangkat dari perkembangan terakhir yang James ikuti di US dan UK. Pemenangan Donald Trump sebagai Presiden terpilih dan British Exit menjadi cerita menarik yang memulai lahirnya "bullshit" tadi. (Bagian 1: Kekuatan dari omongkosong)

Di bagian kedua, James menjelaskan mengapa omongkosong ini bisa menyebar secara masif. Dia membeberkan keterlibatan semua pihak. Mulai dari para politisi, outlet media arus utama (old media), media baru, media palsu, media sosial, dan kita semua. Semua netizen.

Pada bagian ketiga, penulis menerangkan dengan penelusurannya yang sistematis dan argumentatif, bagaimana bullshit bekerja. Mengapa kita demen sama yang namanya hoax, mengapa hoax menguntungkan, dan bullshit culture (sampai di bagian ini, jujur bukunya masih seru untuk dibaca. Masih membuat saya penasaran. Meski font-nya agak kecil dan bikin pelan-pelan bacanya)

Pada bagian terakhir, penulis mencoba memberi solusi awal untuk menekel omongkosong ini. Nggak mudah memang. Omongkosong memang sulit ditangkal. James Ball nggak mengagung-agungkan fake news dkk, tapi objektif menyadarkan pembaca, memang susah menertibkan hoax di sosmed. It's in our culture. Tanpa baca isi artikel, cukup melihat judul tulisan, kita akan membagikan postingan ke jejaring sosial. Asalkan itu sesuai dengan "selera" maupun "aliran politik" kita.

Apakah solusinya sebatas gerakan Turn Back Hoax?
Apakah harus membanjiri linimasa dengan konten positif seperti yang dikemukakan pakar sosmed di acara TV?

Namun dari penjelasan James Ball. Mungkin saja hal-hal tersebut bisa jadi kontra produktif. Karena sebanyak apapun materi positif, akan ada jauh lebih banyak hoax yang beredar (dan dishare oleh si pengguna).

Dan lagi, apakah konten-konten positif tersebut, berita-berita berimbang dari media arus utama yang cover both side akan dibaca masyarakat kebanyakan di Indonesia?

Hmm. Rumit juga ya.

Bullshit grabs us, it pulls us by our existing beliefs and triggers our impulses to share. We tend to believe information that confirms our beliefs, and we tend to find a sensational piece grabbier than a careful and fact-based one.

***


Bagaimana media bisa menghambat gerak hoax?

Mari kita lihat. Fungsi pers adalah memberikan informasi yang bersumber pada kebenaran kepada publik. Di satu sisi. Pers arus utama juga bakal kelimpungan kalau harus menangkis setiap kabar bohong, berita separuh benar, atau isu apapu itu yang beredar di linimasa. Lontaran opini pejabat atau cuitan dari seorang yang berpengaruh. Karena itu dibutukan tim pengecek fakta di ruang redaksi.

Namun bisa dibayangkan, berapa waktu yang diperlukan untuk menalisa sebuah fakta untuk disimpulkan hal itu adalah sebuah kebenaran atau tuduhan tak beralasan. Butuh waktu panjang untuk meriset dan sebagainya. Sementara di sisi yang lain, isu atau berita palsu mungkin akan hadir kembali tiap beberapa saat.

Kita juga tidak bisa sepenuhnya menyalakan media yang kadang tidak pakai verifikasi yang lengkap sebelum menerbitkan artikelnya. Bahkan tidak meralat atau memberi sanggahan ketika yang dilaporkan termasuk dalam kategori hoax. Ruang media jaman now yang menuntut kecepatan dan (mungkin) tenaga yang terbatas membuat keadaan ini seolah dimaklumi di kala banjir informasi.

Oleh sebab itu muncul kebutuhan akan institusi media pengecek fakta yang independen untuk diakui laporannya. Ada 2 lembaga non partisan yang dicontohkan adalah FactCheck.org dan Politifact. Bisa lihat website keduanya untuk melihat bagaimana sistem kerjanya. Kalau di Indonesia web sejenisnya nampaknya belum ada. Kalau udah ada kasih info ya (di kolom komentar).

Bagi para politisi. Solusi yang penuliskan sarankan adalah ajarkan literasi media di sekolah.
Menteri pendidikan, walikota, yang punya wewenang bisa memasukkan program tersebut ke dalam kurikulum sekolah. Nanti bisa bisa termasuk pula bahaya-bahaya apa saja yang mengintai para siswa di ranah daring. Bagaimana tindak pencegahannya.

Menutup tulisan ini, langkah yang dianjurkan penulis untuk kita membendung hoax adalah:

1. Mengetahui bagaimana caranya mengevaluasi sumber-sumber (berita)

2. Mencoba untuk tidak mudah terhisap dalam "conspiratorial thinking".

3. Treat narratives you believe as sceptically as ones you don't.

4. Learn some stats

5. jalankan Sistem Dua. Berasal dari "Thinking Fast and Slow" Daniel Kahneman. Maksudnya jangan langsung klik like atau share ketika membaca sebuah unggahan teman, saudara. Lihat dan berhenti sejenak terlebih dahulu. Amati apakah situs sumber tulisan tersebut valid atau tidak. Isinya positif atau berisi ujaran kebencian. Baru putuskan kalau postingan tersebut cukup sampai di tangan anda atau penting banget sampai harus dishare di sosial media.

Buku ini saya rekomendasikan untuk dibaca bagi anda yang ingin mempelajari bagaimana peta jaman post-truth saat ini. Pun anda yang memiliki ketertarikan dengan dunia media, politik, dan perkembangan sosial masyarakat jaman now.

[Alyssa · Rating 3 out of 5]

You'd think the deluge of Trump/Brexit-related media would have reached saturation long ago, but by this point, I've pretty much given up hope of people ever tiring of news regarding America's clown-in-chief. I picked up James Ball's Post-Truth with the naive belief that it might cover a wider breadth than just those two topics that have bombarded the English-speaking world of late, but sadly, that is exactly what the book spends 95% of its time on. Without a doubt, Post-Truth is well-researched and authoritatively written, but I fear it suffers from being another of at least hundreds of populism-focused books in the wake of recent events. Compared to the rest of the crop, it doesn't stand out enough or offer enough distinct material to make you see things in a new light.



On the plus side, the book benefits from a clear four-part structure, aptly titled "The Power of Bullshit", "Who's Spreading the Shit?", "Why Bullshit Works", and "How to Stop Bullshit". Each part covers exactly what you'd expect, starting with a rehash of Trump and Brexit accompanied by the ways that politicians, different types of media, and the general populace spread fake or misleading information. The book then segues into an overview of the cultural, economic and psychological factors supporting bullshit and ends with a tellingly short list of ideas to combat bullshit. Part II: "Who's Spreading the Shit?" takes up the lion's share of the page count, over five times what's allocated to the chapter on possible solutions. From that, you could make the pessimistic inference that journalists can bemoan the current state of affairs all they like, but nobody has the first clue how to fix it.

Ball's argument centres on the point that sensationalised, rapidly-produced fake news appeals to our emotions and confirmation bias in order to spread much faster than real news or fact-checks debunking the lies. Even if a fake or misleading claim is debunked, this benefits the spreader of the original falsehood, as it directs more traffic towards it. As the saying goes, no attention is bad attention. Ironically (and he does acknowledge this), Ball's references to various pieces of fake news in his book also contribute to getting them more attention. All of this suggests a Gordian knot in which you have fact-checkers trying to bail out a ship with a thimble. Even more disheartening is the reality that the people reading Post-Truth and similar books are probably going to be the polar opposite of those who need to be reading it.

Fortunately, Post-Truth does end with a few ideas that might not be the worst ways to tackle bullshit. For sure, nothing short of a fundamental change in the way our culture views media and information is going to solve the problem entirely, but there are still a few measures that can be taken to stem the tide. It won't be easy and it won't be welcomed, but at some point you have to confront the nasty equilibrium point our information ecosystem's at, where everybody (including those who loudly denounce "fake news") contributes in some shape or form to the culture of mistrust and confusion. Contrary to the questionable beliefs that Russia/Hillary Clinton/the Illuminati/"liberal elites" are running a 24/7 online shill army, we've gotten here pretty organically. Getting out will be easier said than done.

My Blog

[Tara Brabazon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Read this book. Read this book right now. If I can get enough people to read this book, then the world - teaching, learning, politics, militarization and nationalism - may also transform.

This book is about Trump and Brexit, but it is a 'how to' guide about how and why a reality television host became president and the majority of a nation voted against their own best interests.

It is a book about 'bullshit' and that is the correct word to use. How have absolutely irrelevant, pointless, wrong and ridiculous ideas bubbled through the public discourse? This book explains how this has happened and how 'we' - journalists, academics, politicians and citizens - can intervene in the bullshit.

This is the best book I have read on Brexit and Trump. It takes on the bullshit and moves us through it, to a post-Trump age.

[Srilakshmi Atthota · Rating 2 out of 5]

Wish the author had stuck with analyzing trends and making a stronger core argument. All the examples mentioned in the book show the writers own deeply held biases where he can find fault with some groups or political figures but blatantly ignore others.

Another thing I noted is a very strong centrist bias and establishment bias. The author defaults to the centrist politics and establishment media being good without any explanation.

[Scout Dawson · Rating 5 out of 5]

An extremely eye-opening look into how fake news is spread online, how we're all complicit in it, and how debunking attempts often make things worse. Important and urgent read, especially in today's online climate.

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first half of the book largely (and clearly) sums up a lot of what we already knew, but when it draws towards what we can do about the problems, and the obstacles to overcome, it is both eye-opening and sensible.

What we need now is someone to take heed

[Angela · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is bullshit. Boringly establishment, patronising, and shallow.
Post-truth is yet another bourgeois mystification + moral panic because social media’s fluid digital ecosystem threatens the liberal consensus politics and the legacy media’s control of its representations. I’m confused why Ball marks Brexit and Trump as these turning points that have shifted us into the post-truth era, as if disinformation, misinformation, and manipulation hasn’t always been a strategy for states to maintain power? Maybe now it’s because the chickens have come home to roost. Maybe the brash Brexit + Trump campaigns have made more people aware of the previously hidden mechanisms… but even that doesn’t justify why these are such key shifts.
Ball uncritically defaults to centrist position. Doesn’t examine his own positionaliy. Acts as some holier than thou enlightenment equanimous journalist coming to save the dumb dumb masses and dumb dumb politicians from believing the totally bizarre “conspiracy theories” that elites and institutions are corrupt (p.175). Ball is worried about public distrust in establishment media purely because it threatens the status quo. He doesn’t go beyond this to seriously discuss the consequences like racism, xenophobia. Just Russia this Russia that, Islamism blah blah. Ball doesn’t even hide his Islamophobia. Just falls into the same old tropes.

Two good things:
Balls analysis about the issues of objectivity/impartiality that UK broadcasters are required to follow by law and how objectively often just becomes balanced (thus favouring the wrong side) in chapter 11.
Also the stuff about the teenagers running misinformation/bot factories in Velas, Macedonia is funny. Good for them.

Some recommended further reading if you want a critical media scholarship:

Clennon, O. D. (2018) ‘Resisting Post-truth Whiteness: The Grassroots as Sites of Black Radical Activism’.

Mejia, R., Beckermann, K., & Sullivan, C. (2018). White lies: a racial history of the (post)truth. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 15(2), 109–126.

Eva Haifa Giraud; Sarah-Nicole Aghassi-Isfahani, (2020) Post-truths, Common Worlds, and Critical Politics: Critiquing Bruno Latour’s Renewed Critique of Critique.

Nancy Fraser (2017) Progressive neoliberalism versus reactionary populism: a Hobson's choice,

[Terry Clague · Rating 3 out of 5]

An apt birthday gift (thanks Hywel), this was one of a slew of books published in the aftermath of 2016, something of an annus horribilis on many levels which could be characterised as an age in which various chickens came home to bullshit. Or something.

The author, a "data journalist", divides online opinion but clearly has a talent suited to the age - it may be that the technocratic tone and apparent ideological deafness does him no favours with some audiences. His book wants to argue that we're living in a "post-truth" era, which kicked off in and around events such as the election of Donald Trump and "Brexit". This element seems like the weakest of the book given the long history of propaganda and the antecedents of things like Brexit (neoliberalism, Iraq, austerity). In making the argument, he also appears to lack or forget any useful definition of "bullshit" or "post-truth" - a particularly frustrating example being his citation of the inclusion of The S*n newspaper's nasty coverage of the 1989 Hillsborough football disaster and cover-up - which saw straightforward lies purposefully told rather than any theoretical disregard for the concept of truth.

The strengths of the book lie in the analysis of some of the merchants of bullshit, such as Boris Johnson ("broadly credited for creating the phenomenon" of EU myths in his outrageous stint as Brussels correspondent for The Daily Telegraph) and Milo Yiannopoulos (a "serial bullshitter"). If the book had focused on these "Merchants of Bullshit" and brought in more on the political economy of media (incentives to bullshit) and specifically on online publications such as Vice (perhaps looking at the likes of David Carr in opposition to these bullshit forces), it would have been a stronger result.

[Mark Iliff · Rating 3 out of 5]

Subtitled “How bullshit conquered the world”, its release soon after Brexit & Trump is very timely. I wish I could be more enthusiastic.

Ball does a great job of tracking the rise of strategic lying and giving some reasons for its success. I guess I’d hoped the bit where he suggests ways of fighting it would be stronger … optimistic of me perhaps, but surely a prime motivator for reading.

One surprising omission is any attempt to compare and contrast countries where the tactic works with those where it doesn’t. I understand that extending the work beyond English-speaking countries would be a big jump, but since the two countries most affected, UK and US, use first-past-the-post voting systems I’d have liked to see at least some consideration of whether the consequent polarisation of politics facilitates lying. Do Australia, New Zealand and Ireland, for example, have a different experience?

Worth reading, but not unmissable.

[R Davies · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really clear articulation of the dilemma and dangers of how information is communicated, sold, weaponised and diffused to and by people for various agendas. Ball deploys a broad cover under the label,'Bullshit' beyond just "fake news" to include, partial-truths, absurdities, outright fabrications and disingenous reporting as they all serve to undermine collective consensus, the principle of an objective truth or any authority to which one could defer to, outsite of partisan preferences.

The focus is chiefly on Trump and Brexit, but does make reference to similar phenomena elsewhere, and the style of writing is not a confrontational one, aiming to be rational and balanced in exploring the issues. He, looks at the politicians, the media, social media, us as consumers and how the complexity of these forces all come together to contribute to the current climate. This is not a black and white issue with simple causes and effects, and Ball's elucidation of the problems involved don't hint at easy solutions either. By looking at the conditions in which Bullshit thrives: economic pressures, motiviations of finance, politics and psychologically flawed humans, Ball notes it is not particularly surprising, but obviously the scale of the Internet has allowed information wars to break out at relentless pace. It is an informative read, depressing but also makes some positive suggestions for combatting the problem at the end.

From a political point of view, I assume, in all likelihood most people interested in the problem of fake news all, ironically enough operate in more or less the same bubble.

It's not the kind of book you expect certain elements of society to bother with, the partisan maniacs who would no doubt dismiss it as academic "fake news" anyway, so there is, as ever, with socio-pol non fiction books such as these, the problem of how to actually reach across the divide, and somehow communicate this issue more broadly, to those who think anything couched in cautious language reflects some liberal conspiracy ( to what end I have no idea )

Ball offers up a few solutions, perhaps the most practical being, that individually it is incumbent on us all to recognise our own bubbles and make conscious efforts to read and speak where possible beyond that, to gain where possible genuine appreciation of why polar opposite views exist. It's very tough though, as being emotional humans, it's easy to think - well those buggers aren't going to bother trying to understand me, they'll continue in this charade of cartoon characterisations of arguments, of strawmen nonsensities, and the deployment of ludicrous labels' so why bother trying to "listen" to arguments in favour of racism, weird laments about misandry or people who use pathetic labels like SJWs, snowflakes etc. Still, it's hard to see any other way out of it, without collective wills to at least try. I am not remotely optimistic.

[Stan James · Rating 3 out of 5]

The biggest issue with Post-Truth is that the people who could most benefit from it will never read it. In fact, they'd likely just disregard it as more "fake news." For someone like myself, there is little in here that is revelatory. I am only too aware of the rise of not just fake news (both real and imagined) but also what author James Ball calls "bad news," which is not to say someone is calling to tell you your pet hamster Binky just had a very unfortunate accident, but is rather a description of news that is poorly researched and presented, or otherwise fails to meet the standards one would expect from a reputable news source.

Ball does devote a chapter at the end on ways to combat the rise of BS, but it is, perhaps by design, a combination of the obvious ("if you want to be trusted, be trustworthy," "try not to succumb to conspiratorial thinking"), the somewhat depressing (entreaties to essentially dumb things down, wear your biases openly, and try to look anti-establishment even if you aren't, because the tide has turned against the establishment) to the exceedingly unlikely (like asking people to go outside their bubbles. While on the surface it makes sense to step beyond your proverbial echo chamber--Ball advises following "thoughtful people" on the other side--it entirely skips over how one addresses or interacts with the more problematic people at the fringes that are driving so much of the BS into the mainstream. How does one even find a "thoughtful" racist, much less engage them meaningfully?).

Some of the suggestions are appealing, though. I particularly like the concept of the tech giants funding an independent news organization as a way to combat the death of newspapers and other news media. But even if such an organization existed, you would still have plenty of news media that are more interested in pushing an extremist agenda propped up by lies and distortion.

In the end this is a bleak book because, though Ball never explicitly says so, you are left with the impression that most people are easily-snookered idiots, and that perhaps we have only made it so far as a civilization because a strong minority has pushed against the ignorant masses. But for now the ignorant masses seem to be winning--or rather, allowing the autocrats they adore to win.

[Bob Colwick · Rating 4 out of 5]

As most/all magicians will tell you, one reason that illusions work is because there is something in all of us that wants to be fooled. Although it makes little sense when taken at face value, a significant amount of our biases, predilections, and aversions have a similar basis in our genetic temperament to gravitate towards the absurd (especially if it lines up with our beliefs, viewpoints, etc); this gives any magician an instant advantage, even before they've drawn their first card or pulled a rabbit out of a hat.

Kept in check, this in-born tendency can cause minor problems for us (such as my undying belief, against all reason, that the Cubs won't take another 107 years or so to win another World Series) but keeps things on the level (more or less). Let run amok, however, what harmful effects can result if entire societies have significant numbers of people who not only believe B.S. but also passionately espouse it to others? What effects can that have on our faith that others (media, elected officials, emergency personnel, etc) are telling us the truth and have our best interest in mind? What methods can we use to help return to normalcy?

To establish this analysis, Ball first distinguishes between a 'lie' and 'bullshit'...while a lie is usually a crafted fabrication that relies on a twist of some truth, bullshit has a more anarchic approach; it doesn't care about whether or not it is true, false, or viewed as either one - its purpose is to boldly gaslight with specious reasoning, facts, or dubious claims and boldly proclaim them as gospel. Attempts to rebuff these nuggets can arguably do more harm than good; by the time a fact-checker has spent a few hours correcting an instance of B.S. that took 10 seconds to spout off, the B.S.'er has usually spouted off several new ones and over time the fact-checker spends an eternity catching up.

'Post Truth' aims to expose this process, examine our proclivity to let strains of it through the front gate (regardless of age, gender, religion, political leaning, etc), and identify ways that we can help subvert its influence in our own lives and then - in turn - the world.

[Shaun · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great read that offers fairly good analysis of the problem of a post-truth society.
Ball analyzes a number of significant factors that contribute to a world filled with fake news. It's not just politicians but the economic incentive system for both old and new media (particularly social media) and for psychological and sociological reasons.

I was intrigued to learn that a small town in Macedonia cranked out large amount of fake claims during US election time because it's profitable to make unsubstantiated claims that is easily picked up and spread on the internet.

Much of the problem is also related to people's "tribal" mentality of defending one's own cherished positions so that anything that is affirming is shared and supported without question. Moreover,
when presented with reasoned opposing views to the extent that it only strengthens one's own position, dismissing the other (a psychological study simply termed it the "backfire effect).

The advice in the end is fairly straight-forward and by now a little dated but some of the key arguments Ball advanced is significant: to tackle the problem schools need to teach people media literacy; the media needs willing to offer a clear, concise, alternative narrative is a good one as the old model of objective journalism is no longer trusted by the masses; and people need to be willing to cross the divide of considering alternative viewpoints (truly listening).

My main complaint would be that over two-thirds of the book focuses on the examples of Brexit and the 2016 election. Ball doesn't mention how the post-truth situation has been around for quite a while, being influential in autocratic Russia and Latin America democracies as well. I was curious to find that Ball didn't consider the example of chaotic post-truth Italian politics as well.

[ItchyFeetReader · Rating 4 out of 5]

Knowing what people we disagree with actually say and think – rather than the straw men and caricatures we create in our heads – helps us bridge gaps, and makes it harder to demonise people whose politics are different from our own.

Ball succinctly digs beneath the catch all of “fake news” and explores how the emotional and sensationalised, the half truths and full on lies came to be so prevalent in US and UK politics and culture.

The book is structured in four parts. The first, “The Power of Bull Shit” summarises both the 2016 US Presidential election and Brexit and provides the framing and context for much of the rest of the writing. Part 2 explores who is responsible with chapters covering politicians (particularly depressing), the different forms of media as well as asking the reader to take a level of culpability. Part 3 then looks at why this effective, making compelling arguments particularly around the profitability of spreading untruths. Part 4 is more positive and looks to reflect on what could be done by all the parties discussed in part 2 to turn the tide.

I found the pithy journalistic style compelling and the amount of background data and studies referenced really helped me clarify my thinking including stress testing and discarding previously held assumptions. Ball makes his points well and clearly particularly around the earning models of old media and how new and social media challenges that.

This would have been a five star read for me if Ball had put the current situation into a wider historical context or compared with other nations who perhaps do not have the same issues currently, however acknowledge that this may have distracted from the conciseness of message that I so enjoyed.

[Pat · Rating 3 out of 5]

Who is author James Ball? "James Ball has worked in political, data, and investigative journalism in the United States and in the UK for BuzzFeed, The Guardian, and the Washington Post in a career spanning TV, digital, print, and alternative media. His reporting has won several prizes including the Pulitzer Prize for public service." (Barnes and Noble)

In this book Ball looks into the rise of T rump and his first year of bs as well as the Brexit vote and its background. I admittedly skipped some of the Brexit information included but his subtitle works for both T rump and Brexit misinformation. Divided into four sections: Power of Bullshit; Who's Spreading the Sh*t; Why Bullshit Works; and How to Stop Bullshit. Includes nine pages of references online as well as bibliography and further reading.

Well worth a read to understand how T rump garners most of the media attention with lies and what the media and the public could be doing to recognize and rein in the bs. One solid suggestion is for schools to teach media literacy and safe internet use.

[Mia · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author has written a work of recent history that is very relevant this week, in which Parliament voted down the Brexit plan of Teresa May and she just missed being replaced as her party’s leader. May had a thankless task: to try to convince a bunch of skeptics that she had gotten the best deal for her country. In the meantime, the real culprits, Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson, et.al., are missing. As Ball described, the Leave Campaign never told the voters the truth. Just as a few months later, Donald Trump was voted in to office (although losing the popular vote by nearly three million votes) on a campaign of anti-immigrant rhetoric seasoned with xenophobia, fighting a phony war on coal, and promising an ocean to sea wall THAT MEXICO WOULD PAY FOR. Of course, none of what he said was backed up with facts. Ball not only described the recent events succinctly but he has some very good advice for fighting against bull*. I find his choice of words unfortunate because he is talking about propaganda and dangerous propaganda at that.

[Nic · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoy what I generally call "bullshit books", so the title of this one made it an obvious inclusion in my list. Despite life meaning that I took far longer to read it than I'd hoped, I found that perhaps I'd set my hopes too high. There's nothing wrong with the book at all - it's a fair and frank assessment of the modern 'post truth' era - but I found that the first two parts of the book, in fact most of the book with the exception of the conclusion, was rehearsing a story I already knew inside out. Aside from the lack of skill in putting such a book together, or indeed writing it down, I felt as though I could've written it myself.
That's not a criticism of the book at all, in fact I'd recommend this book to someone less 'connected' to the world of bullshit than me, but if you've already paid attention to the post truth worlds of Trump, Brexit and the problems with cost-cutting journalism and the Internet then maybe look elsewhere for your 'insight'.

[Bethany Woodcock · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was excited to read this book after the first chapter that gave a broad overview of 'post-truth', 'fake news' and 'bullshit' coming from all sides of the political spectrum.

However, as I read more I could see how the book was unfortunately political aligned despite 'bullshit' being spouted by all and every side. I would definitely have given this book a higher rating if it had spoken more than just about Donald Trump and Brexit (groaaaan) and more on the 'every day' bullshit, not just that related to large political events.

It gives good advice about making sure not to just believe headlines and be skeptical about all narratives, but it seems that the author went against his own advice at the start of the book.

[Nia Nymue · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wasn't sure if this was a credible book, especially when I read the first chapter and saw that many of its sources are from Twitter/ online.

But I think it was still a really good read. It makes you think about what objectivity in reporting really is, and if it's possible, and I'm now much more aware of the various parts of an online article, and how sites are struggling to maintain professionalism while making money.

The writer offers some suggestions to various stakeholders at the end. They're good, but I'm wondering if politicians and media will actually heed it. It seems like readers are the ones most likely to, but even then it's hard.

Worth a read.

[Yasmeen · Rating 2 out of 5]

2016 marked the birth of the post-truth era. Sophistry and spin have coloured politics since the dawn of time, but two shock events – the Brexit vote and Donald Trump’s elevation to US President – heralded a departure into murkier territory.

Bullshit gets you noticed. Bullshit makes you rich. Bullshit can even pave your way to the Oval Office.

This is bigger than fake news and bigger than social media. It’s about the slow rise of a political, media and online infrastructure that has devalued truth.

This is the story of bullshit: what’s being spread, who’s spreading it, why it works – and what we can do to tackle it.

[Duane Prejean · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is an incredible treatise on many of the problems with information today.
We tend to believe what we want to believe and we can manipulate facts and half truths to mirror our own biases and points of view. This book reminds us that, if we can, we should try to be more discerning of consumption of news and information.

[Greta · Rating 3 out of 5]

If truth is stranger than fiction, then Post-Truth trumps it all. The poster-boy (POTUS) in this narrative gets numerous mentions in this book about all the (fake) news that's fit to print. We live in interesting times, indeed.

[Josh · Rating 5 out of 5]

An inquisitive analysis of the modern media infrastructure which seeks to understand why 'fake news' has spread and how we need to act to stop it. Very interesting reflections on the objectivity of journalism and a shift that may need to take place.

[Omar · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very good read through which I've learned a lot. Keep up the good work.

[Thomas B · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mildly dated already (times are moving fast!!) but a good basic primer in understanding the biases and drivers behind our collective consumption of information, both true and false.

[Diana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well worth a read for anyone interested in fake news, Brexit, the Trump election and the spreading of rumours in social media.

[Roman Loban · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very important book and essential reading for everyone, who is interested in tackling media bullshit both from the left and right. James Ball is a truly talented journalist and writer!

[Mark · Rating 5 out of 5]

Eye opening. Mr. Ball examines what Bullshit occurred and culminated in Brexit and the Trump Presidency. Depressing implications at times; however, do-able solutions are proposed.