I’m sure you’ve heard the news that last week a poll from Public Policy Polling found a disturbing number of Americans believe in conspiracies large and small. Several of their findings underscore just why it’s so important to continue critically examining the claims made by cable television documentaries, popular press books, and websites about aliens and ancient mysteries. Before we take a look at the poll, let’s issue a couple of caveats: First, this poll was specifically designed to test political differences on conspiracy theories, so the methodology may prevent this from being extrapolated from members of political parties to the general population. The survey looked at 2012 presidential election voters only, and this may or may not accurately represent the remainder of the population who did not or could not vote. Second, the poll asked about a belief in aliens, but it did not specify whether this meant a belief in extraterrestrial life somewhere in the universe (a scientific probability) or a belief in an advanced species such as the Greys coming to sodomize sleeping Americans (scientifically doubtful). Therefore, there is no way to parse the 29% of respondents who said they believe in aliens.
That said, let’s look at the results:
And this only represents the findings that directly correlate with the cable documentary series I cover on this blog. Additional conspiracies involving fluoride, contrails, 9/11, and vaccines have similar or greater belief levels. When you compare these numbers against the ratings for cable television series—the 1 million who watch America Unearthed or the 2.2 million who watched Ancient Aliens at its height—you begin to see that these shows represent only a fraction of the audience for their ideas. While it may seem silly to spend time debunking a show with just one million viewers (0.3% of the American population), when you realize the sheer number of people—tens of millions!—who are open to such ideas, it no longer seems quite so quixotic and exercise. It is surely no coincidence that the conspiracy theories that Americans believe in their tens of millions are alternative ideas heavily promoted in the popular media. Conspiracy theories that do not garner significant media attention, such as the idea that cats are aliens who enslaved humans (yes, that’s a thing), that the earth is hollow, or that Saddam Hussein had an ancient alien Stargate, do not find belief levels approaching those of ideas seen weekly on television, discussed heavily online, or promoted in alternative history books. As I’ve said before, the popular media do a great disservice to science by taking these numbers as confirmation that these topics sell. Instead, the numbers show us that people will believe what the media and the culture tells them could be true. Major book publishers simply refuse to publish books that openly doubt conspiracy theories. It’s happened to me, and it’s happened to other authors: We are told by publishers that we need to “leave the door open” for aliens, Atlantis, etc., or we can kiss our book deals good-bye. Television is worse. Aside from PBS and scattered lights on cable, the TV dial is wall-to-wall anti-science conspiracy nonsense. Academics don’t help the situation, though it is not their fault. Scientists, historians, and archaeologists are busy actually generating new knowledge, and they don’t have the time or the energy (with some exceptions) to fight this battle every day—and due to the constraints of their jobs, their publications don’t speak to popular audiences and thus have little impact outside academia. What historical truth needs is more popularizers, people who can interpret the work of academics for people who are interested but not specialists, people who can make history interesting and show that the truth is more fascinating than lies. Because of the decisions made by publishers a few decades ago to give up on popularizers by professionalizing book writing to the point that Ph.D. is now considered a prerequisite to publish “serious” books (mostly because they write the way elite critics enjoy and have university jobs, so they don’t expect to be paid up front), the much of the popular history category has fallen to “For Dummies” books and alternative history conspiracy theorists. It’s not absolute, of course; many journalists and other writers produce history books aimed at popular audiences each year, but the trend toward dividing books more and more cleanly between highbrow, academic work and lowbrow, popular work is unmistakable. The old-fashioned idea of the “middlebrow,” books for smart people who were engaged but non-experts, has all but vanished. Could you imagine a Barbara Tuchman today? It’s getting hard to do. Can you believe that there used to be a time when science and history documentaries aired on network television? Today broadcast networks can’t even remember a time when they used to show alternative history documentaries. Even cable has exiled real science and real history to the outer limits of its schedule, convinced that audiences actively run from truth. In truth, though, the media have trained the audience to expect less, and the audience responded. The decline of the middlebrow forces larger numbers of people to choose between highbrow and lowbrow. For some, they will move up to academic history, but it’s a hard sell since academic work can be dry, highly specialized, and hard for non-specialists to master. It drives larger numbers of people who won’t or can’t engage with academic history into the arms of conspiracy writers, the only people left who talk to them as fellow-travelers on a voyage of adventure. Publishers and TV networks, seeing this problem of their own making, take it for confirmation that their gutting of the middlebrow was well-advised. And the cycle continues.
18 Comments
Coridan Miller
4/8/2013 08:17:41 am
" What historical truth needs is more popularizers, people who can interpret the work of academics for people who are interested but not specialists, people who can make history interesting and show that the truth is more fascinating than lies."
Reply
The Other J.
4/8/2013 08:43:45 am
"Perhaps a 24 hour cable channel devoted to historical documentaries!"
Reply
B L
4/8/2013 08:54:14 am
Agreed, Coridan. H2 proves that people are interested in historical subject matter (most viewers believe what they are seeing is accurate because it is on the History channel). If a production company would make historically accurate documentaries in the style of America Unearthed they might be very successful. Academics need to speak to the common man if they don't want these ancient alien nut-jobs to overtake them in the popular culture. I think continued encouragement of pretentiousness and elitism amongst the learned can perpetuate a sense of conspiracy and secrecy to the uninformed.
Reply
Jon B
4/8/2013 11:41:34 am
4% of respondents think it would be hilarious to tell a pollster that they believe Lizard People secretly run the government.
Reply
John R
4/8/2013 12:40:57 pm
My bad.
Reply
Cathleen Anderson
4/8/2013 02:50:01 pm
Science and Discovery do have some decent programming. One of my favorites is Mythbusters.
Reply
charlie
4/8/2013 03:13:12 pm
TLC used to have actual programs one could learn from. Discovery also used to have real science programs. Yes, "Mythbusters" is fun and you can learn a bit from it.
Reply
Thane
4/8/2013 04:14:16 pm
One of the worst things that happened to journalism was the advent of the 24 hour news channel.
Reply
Gunn
4/9/2013 03:27:14 am
"What historical truth needs is more popularizers, people who can interpret the work of academics for people who are interested but not specialists, people who can make history interesting and show that the truth is more fascinating than lies."
Reply
Gunn
4/9/2013 03:54:36 am
This is from gotquestions.org:
Reply
Paul Cargile
4/9/2013 05:59:09 am
Truth also doesn't care whether you believe it or not.
Gunn
4/9/2013 08:08:14 am
Of course that depends on what kind of truth one is talking about, whether capitalized or not. With a cap, Truth does care, very much. (Just an observation.)
Christopher Randolph
4/9/2013 06:51:30 am
Jason -
Reply
4/9/2013 07:06:16 am
It's certainly true. The total number of voters in 2012 was 129 million, and if 4% believe in reptile people, that's a minimum of 5.2 million people, even before trying to extrapolate to the non-voting population. It's also true that the million people who watch H2 in turn influence those who hear the ideas secondhand, which is probably why those professing belief are several orders of magnitude larger than those who actively watch the programming.
Reply
Matt Mc
4/9/2013 07:52:09 am
I blame John Carpenters THEY LIVE for all reptilian humanoid theories, it was Roddy Pippers compelling performance that did it.
RLewis
4/9/2013 02:35:38 pm
Jason, Have you seen similar (recent) studies for Europe and Asian populations? I know UFO belief is pretty prevalent everywhere, but I wonder if other countries buy into the government conspiracy theories.
Reply
4/9/2013 11:25:59 pm
I know that results are similar in Britain, but I haven't seen polls for other places. I know that UFO belief is big in India and China, but I'm not sure about conspiracy theories.
Reply
4/10/2013 02:28:57 am
Unfortunately, having lived and worked full time in France (and travelled and lived throughout the UK and the rest of Europe as well), I have to say that I found almost as many Europeans believing in conspiracy theories as Americans. The only difference is that the Europeans don't have the Evangelical/Creationist bent to it. That's the part they laugh at Americans for. But as for simple acceptance that big corporations are controlling things, UFOs actually existing, Illuminati and all sorts of other nonsense, it's nearly the same. This is anecdotal, of course, and I'd love to see a study. The evangelical/religious stuff tends to get replaced more with "spiritual" nonsense. IE: They far more readily believe in ghosts than angels (at least in the UK). I usually consider that there is just as much BS on the left as there is on the right in such matters. It's just that the right in America tends to be far more outspoken about it.
Reply
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorI am an author and researcher focusing on pop culture, science, and history. Bylines: New Republic, Esquire, Slate, etc. There's more about me in the About Jason tab. Newsletters
Enter your email below to subscribe to my newsletter for updates on my latest projects, blog posts, and activities, and subscribe to Culture & Curiosities, my Substack newsletter.
Categories
All
Terms & ConditionsPlease read all applicable terms and conditions before posting a comment on this blog. Posting a comment constitutes your agreement to abide by the terms and conditions linked herein.
Archives
September 2024
|