The strongest predictor of whether someone believed in COVID-19-related misinformation and risks related to the vaccine was whether they viewed COVID-19 prevention efforts in terms of symbolic strength and weakness. In other words, this group focused on whether an action would make them appear to fend off or “give in” to untoward influence.

[…]

Our findings highlight the limits of countering misinformation directly, because for some people, literal truth is not the point.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Focus on material arguments, find common ground on the basis of class upon which to make such arguments. Only make them if needed. We don’t need to have high degree of conformity and we’re not gonna get it either way. And all of this should be anchored to a purpose for doing it. E.g. fighting the oligarchy, reaching better alignment within a family, etc. If there’s no worthy purpose, we shouldn’t expend social capital in convincing people.

    • porcoesphino@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Aligning on a purpose is important. I’d argue that being aware of how on board people are for that purpose is important too. I recently tried to say that the family chat should have less influencer posts since we don’t all agree on the positions and it causes friction. Boy was that a shit show