Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp: Let's counter alternative facts with positive stories

In recent years we have had an independence referendum campaign run on fearmongering and false promises of more powers, and a Brexit campaign won in England on misplaced xenophobia (people uncomfortable with Muslim and African immigration voted to stop Swedish, French and Danish immigration) and completely false claims about the cost of EU membership and what we could do with the savings.

Now we have a US President whose definition of fact is whatever he self-defines as fact, and that’s a very dangerous thing.

In Scotland we started to think Trump was a bit mad long before it was trendy to do so. A key indicator was when he gave evidence to the Scottish Parliament on the impact of offshore wind farms.

He said: “If you dot your landscape with these horrible, horrible structures, you will do tremendous damage.”

Challenged as to what evidence he had to support his claims, he replied: “I am the evidence. I am an expert in tourism. I am considered a world-class expert in tourism, so when you say: ‘where is the evidence?’ I am the evidence.”

The evidence of his own eyes told him that more people attended his inauguration and so he told his press officer to lie to the White House press corps on his first day.

Here in the UK our politicians are not immune to the self-verified facts affliction. During the EU referendum campaign Michael Gove, when challenged on his ridiculous claims that had been dismissed by expert opinion, said: “I think the people of this country have had enough of experts”.

Politicians in general used to be highly trusted, but scandals and incompetence eroded that trust. Resultantly, they have latched on to every scientific report and stream of data and drawn their own often incorrect conclusions, politicising science and economics to the point that the people no longer trust experts by association with politics.

This is a dangerous time, as democracy requires informed intelligent analysis of all sides of an argument before reaching a conclusion. Is that even possible nowadays?

Democracy is not under direct attack. How could it be? It is a populist prerequisite for avoiding anarchy: people offered choices (even if there is little choice) and allowed to vote tend to go back into their shell and stop complaining after votes are counted.

Democracy is, however, being fundamentally undermined on four fronts.

First, we have social tribalism. Social media allows groups of people with beliefs to share evidence that backs up the beliefs of the group.

The echo chamber of social media confirms and re-confirms beliefs, and when outsiders challenge those beliefs they can’t win the debate as there are hundreds if not thousands of e-friends who can supply the necessary counter-arguments. This means that moving people from one belief system to another is getting harder and harder as tribalism increases.

Secondly, this echo effect boosts confirmation bias: people looking only for data and opinion that confirms their own thinking, their own precious beliefs. Ipso facto any evidence that counters your belief challenges your own self-identity and becomes a threat.

Here again in social media – a sterile, social but non-physical environment – people feel more comfortable. Heated exchanges become the norm as the threat of physical violence is reduced.

This empowers problem three, the increasing acceptance of cognitive dissonance. People think you can’t trust experts and your own social group backs up your entrenched beliefs so passionately. So what if the facts are against you? You have your own alternative facts.

Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, stated this week that he won’t lie to the press but he “may sometimes disagree with the facts”.

That leads us to our final trend undermining democracy – fake news. The Sunday Sport and National Enquirer are famed for it but now anyone with a computer can publish absolute lies and make their webpage look like the BBC or CNN, and there will always be a tribe that believes it and shares it because it wants to. So what advice can I give my "tribe" in attracting potential Yes voters in the era of say-anything politics?

1) Check and re-check your facts, challenge your own confirmation bias. If it's an economic issue and it’s not on the Business for Scotland site , be sceptical.

2) Quality check your own tribe. If you find something incorrect, tell people, as it will be damaging if it is exposed as a myth.

3) Study the other side’s arguments with an open mind. When you understand why they appeal you may decide to deploy a different argument that is more effective.

4) Never get into a fight online. If you engage a troll you become a troll yourself. No matter how the debate goes both tribes will say they won, but any undecided onlooker will see you both as trolls. And don’t swear. Every profane tweet or update you post lessens your credibility with those you want to persuade. Don’t repeat your opponents’ lies or name calling. If you call yourself a proud Cybernat then you confirm the existence of "Cybernatery". When both sides give as good as they get you’ll make it look as though your side is worse .

5) Don’t beat people to death with fact and counter fact. Simply tell a better story. Unionism is an end in itself with no hope of progress, but independence is a means to an end. Speak from the heart, paint a picture of the better nation you want to create and just how we can do it. Allow people to visualise the positive change you want and those Unionist exaggerated/invented fears that are holding them back will shrink and eventually disappear.

6) And finally, above all, find time to get away from the keyboard – deliver leaflets, man a stall, register voters and meet people. When you do, don’t frown and argue but smile, inform, educate and inspire. If we all do this we will create a fairer, greener, inclusive, forward-looking, healthier and more prosperous nation run by people who care about Scotland for the benefit of the people of Scotland.