Idiocracy in America
The Sparkly Insistence of Misinformation
Completely out of ideas — Part two
A couple of days ago, I published a piece about communicating with my hippy-turned QAnon mother after the 2020 election. This is the follow-up. If you didn’t read the first article, you may not understand some of the references.
Brief Recap:
Assuming I had hurt Mom’s feelings with my email debunking her buddy’s “Team Q” photo, I sent her this message by way of apology:
I just wanted to say that I don’t want to be in conflict with you at all. I am sure you feel attacked and ganged up on, and that is not my intention. I just feel like the last few times I have talked to you, you want to talk about JFK Jr. being alive, how stupid wearing masks is, and so on. I try to steer the conversation away from those things, but you always bring it back. I am never going to think wearing masks is a big deal, that JFK Jr. is alive, that Democrats are evil clones, or that Trump is a good president or even a good person. I don’t want to receive anything about that stuff via email either. I NEVER send you stuff or bring up stuff that is contrary to your beliefs. All I expect is that you show the same courtesy to me. We share many of the same interests, so there is plenty to talk about besides those things. I don’t want there to be a rift between us. I just don’t want to talk about that stuff.
This was Mom’s response:
Thanks Christine…I have been feeling pretty bombarded and sad, and I don’t want to be in conflict with you or any of the others, either. I feel much better after you sent this message. The only reason I sent you Michael’s email was because he didn’t send it to a few people. I think you are probably right about the sign and the formation that the soldiers made…ie not a Q.
It’s not very satisfying, is it? This is the nature of dealing with my mom. She doesn’t have the wits to defend her position, but it’s impossible to change her mind. Unless of course, she “discovers” the information on her own. I spent several hours constructing my response to her — here is my message:
I am sorry you are feeling bombarded and sad. That makes me sad. I want you to know that Merrillynn, Gretchen, and I responded to your post completely independently of one another. I wrote to each of them after the fact about how I thought it was interesting that after months and years of ignoring your posts, we all felt the need to respond.
The reason you received several unpleasant responses to your email probably had to do with the election. Everyone I know felt such a tremendous relief that Trump would be out of office, and after four years of constant stress, we could finally stop worrying about it all the time. As passionately as you feel about your cause, I feel, and I assume Gretchen and Merrillynn feel just as passionately against it. To continuously get emails from your own mother, or sister that are completely contrary to your beliefs, and that you find deeply offensive is bound to reach a tipping point.
I know that when you send these things or talk about these things, you are not trying to make me feel bad, but I need you to understand that that’s the outcome.
I like video games and sometimes watch tutorials about how to complete certain video game tasks. Even though I find those videos very useful, I don’t send them to you, because I know you won’t be interested in the slightest. Receiving a video game tutorial would probably confuse more than upset you, but what if my hobby was something that I know you found offensive?
Let’s say I really liked to hunt. I know that you hate hunting, but I frequently send you pictures of the big bucks and other animals I just shot and killed anyway. And when I talk to you, I continuously bring up stories about my hunting trips and all of the animals I’ve killed. You would probably really hate that and would be really disturbed as to why I would keep doing it. That’s the way we feel about the things you are trying to push on us. My opinions and interests are just as important to me as yours are to you, but the difference is that I don’t push my conflicting, or uncommon interests on you. Sure, I will argue with you about it a bit when you bring it up or send me stuff, but I don’t initiate the exchange.
You always talk about how you can’t believe everything that’s reported in the mainstream media. I agree with that. I don’t know what you’re picturing as far as where I get my information. I really don’t follow the news that closely, because it upsets me. It’s not like I’m glued to CNN or any other information source.
We (mostly Curtis) watch some political programming, like John Oliver and Bill Maher who are both on HBO. They are both left-leaning, but take care to present both sides of whatever argument they are addressing. Bill Maher, in particular, talks shit about liberals and Democrats all the time.
The FCC had a policy that required any organization holding a broadcasting license to report both sides of a controversial topic. The policy was called the Fairness Doctrine and was in place from 1947–1987. Once this policy was eliminated, very extreme broadcasters, such as Rush Limbaugh began to appear. Here is a link to the policy if you care: Wikipedia link to Fairness Doctrine
I think this was a great policy, and I am sorry it was done away with. Many people believe that the dissolution of this policy is what has led to the extreme divide between the Republican and Democratic parties. When you remove empathy and understanding for the other side, you are left with division and hate. Bill Maher still follows the standard set forth by the Fairness Doctrine. Whatever the topic of discussion is for the weekly show, he invites guests from both sides of the debate and allows them to express their viewpoints.
Another source we get news from is PBS. We (again, mostly Curtis) sometimes watch PBS News Hour. PBS, in general, would likely be considered left-leaning, but its news programming is very objective and is not presented in an opinion-oriented fashion at all. PBS News Hour also continues to follow the standards of the FCC’s Fairness Doctrine and reports both sides of the issues.
If the sources for the material you send to me are a good representation of where your information is coming from, then your information is not objective at all. If you are only looking at conspiracy and pro-Trump sites, you’re not getting a complete picture. In my opinion, your information sites are the equivalent of The National Enquirer.
You admit that the photo of the soldiers is not likely a Q, but my point was not to discredit that one photo. My point was to argue that people see what they want to see. You and Mike were expecting to see a Q in that formation of soldiers, so that’s what you saw. It’s not hard to deceive people who don’t question what you’re presenting.
I know why you forwarded Mike’s reply. You thought it was intelligent and convincing, and would help us to see the light. It did just the opposite. It proved that there’s false information being presented to the public, and it’s our responsibility as consumers to scrutinize the information we receive before we accept it. And certainly, before we share it with others.
If you think about the election logically, you’ll realize that it makes no sense to say the Democrats stole the election. The polls heavily favored Biden, and it looked like he would have a landslide win. If the Democrats were to steal the election, all they needed to do was follow what the polls were dictating, and we wouldn’t be where we are today. More importantly, if this had been a fraudulent election, the Democrats would certainly have given themselves the Senate majority, and wouldn’t have lost seats in Congress.
I am quite sure I have said enough at this point. This took me a long time to write, and since I’ve quietly accepted media from you that I didn't agree with, I’m hoping you’ll have the courtesy to watch the two videos I’ve included. They are not intended to change your mind, but rather to illustrate how many people (myself and sisters included) feel in regard to Trump and his followers. It may help you to understand why you received such a reaction to your video.
You may not be a hateful and divisive person, but you must understand that many of Trump’s followers are, and they make no secret of their hateful beliefs. Since you do not access mainstream media, I doubt you realize how powerfully the people who voted against Trump feel. These videos illustrate not an overwhelming love towards Joe Biden, but an overwhelming hatred towards Trump. The first video is of Van Jones reacting to Joe Biden’s victory being called. Van Jones is a lawyer who has written three best-selling books and is a contributor on CNN. In the video, he is a guest during the election coverage. The second video is of reactions to Joe Biden’s win in the streets of cities across the country (I wasn’t going to link the videos for this Medium article because I imagine most of you saw these or similar videos around that time. But I added them below in case anyone wants to see them. The Van Jones video is incredibly emotional and worth watching if any of you didn’t see it at the time.)
Mom never responded to this message. I’ve had several similar email and phone exchanges, typically triggered by her sending something that bothers me, but they never go well. I try to communicate in a sensitive manner and point out that she’s becoming more and more distant from me and my sisters. I also try to explain that her interests seem increasingly negative, but she always gets her feelings hurt and always misses the point. My mother hasn’t really spoken to my sister Gretchen for several years, because Gretchen hurt her feelings during a similar discussion.
I’ve read so many pieces about how horribly biased the media is on both sides of the aisle, and it made me wonder how many people know about The Fairness Doctrine. If you’ve ever thought that things didn’t used to be so biased, you are not wrong. This country has become more and more divided since the policy was done away with.
More stories about the difficulties of dealing with my mother:
