Fake News: Riding The Polarisation Train all the way to Chaos Town
- Marco
- Jan 9
- 4 min read
As we welcome President Trump back into the White House for a second term, a growing section of society is grappling with the question: How did this become possible? Again.
Polling data reveals that false claims significantly influenced people's perceptions of the candidates, shaping opinions on pivotal issues such as the economy, immigration, and crime. This influence was amplified by how news media framed the campaign, often prioritising sensationalism over substance.
In this post, I’ll examine how a “win-at-all-costs” strategy—underpinned by fear, division, and disinformation may lead to short-term victories at the cost of long-term societal erosion. Who controls the influence, how are they accountable, and how are our decisions so easily manipulated?
Is this Democracy's Turning Point?
Democracy has long been hailed as the benchmark in human governance, offering fairness, equality, and representation. But it is not immune to erosion. A successful democracy is based on following the rules and compromise and is of course predicated on the ability of the populace to think critically. But in an era dominated by disinformation and manipulation, polarising narratives are perhaps the greatest threat democracy has faced. When trust in institutions—media, government, even science—is eroded, democracy’s ability to function falters.
The need to win has never before had such dire consequences…
The problem is that, on certain levels, fear, lies, and manipulation are successfully used in many political campaigns and beyond.
Brexit provides a strong example of polarisation in practice, both politically and socially, within the United Kingdom. The 2016 referendum, in which 52% voted to leave the European Union and 48% voted to remain, sharply divided the nation and is a great example of how polarising narratives, particularly those rooted in fear and identity, can reshape national discourse and create enduring divisions. The binary choice presented in the referendum left little room for nuance, forcing people into oppositional camps and deepening social fractures.
It could be easily argued that fear and division are now more effective tools for achieving power than trust, transparency, or unity. But why is fear so effective? Because it overrides reason, short-circuits critical thinking, and triggers our survival instincts. In the hands of those seeking power at all costs, fear is a weapon, wielded to exploit vulnerabilities and distract from systemic failures.
Trust, Ethics, and Transparency: The Difficult Route to Genuine Success?
While trust, ethics, and transparency may appear restrictive if we follow any timeline long enough, we can see that subverting them for a quick win will ultimately only lead to reduced sustainability and potentially catastrophic long-term consequences.
A great example of this is the Silicon Valley healthcare startup, Theranos. Founded in 2003 by Elizabeth Holmes, claiming to revolutionize blood testing with technology that could perform numerous tests using just a few drops of blood. The company quickly rose to prominence, securing high-profile partnerships and a $9 billion valuation, while Holmes became a celebrated entrepreneur. However, it was later revealed that Theranos’ technology was non-functional, and the company had falsified test results and misled investors, regulators, and patients. The scandal led to the company’s collapse in 2018, significant financial losses for stakeholders, and criminal charges against Holmes and COO Ramesh Balwani.
Theranos is a textbook example of how unethical practices can yield impressive gains temporarily but lead to irreparable damage. The scandal should have in essence been a wake-up call to huge MNCs, organisations and political parties, discouraging similar shortcuts in other industries. However, history shows we rarely learn from our failures, opting instead for the same reckless shortcuts.
Polarisation in Moderation?
Polarisation, when carefully managed, can be a useful catalyst for engagement. In the same way, it creates divisiveness in politics it can create excitement and drama in sports. This division can heighten the intensity of competition, foster a sense of identity, and amplify the emotional stakes. When polarisation is strong, matches transcend the sporting event itself, becoming a cultural and social phenomenon.
Celtic vs. Rangers: The Quintessential Polarised Rivalry
The Old Firm derby between Celtic and Rangers illustrates this perfectly: a rivalry steeped in cultural and political history that elevates football into an emotional battle. Its roots go beyond sport, touching on religious, cultural, and political divides in Scotland. There is almost no such thing as a meaningless match. It’s a match where casual fans become diehard; it’s a match that people in Glasgow plan their lives around.
With such a high level of emotional engagement, the stakes are critically high. You aren’t just trying to win a game of football; it’s a symbolic triumph for your community, bragging rights, and perhaps the peace of mind that ‘that lot’ never beat you.
But as in politics when you emotionally charge citizens there will inevitably be negative consequences. Aggression and hostility are no strangers to old firm days. And of those alienated by the whole thing, it's maybe best to stay indoors until the whole thing blows over.
A Call to Awareness
Polarisation is here to stay. It’s just too effective to be dismissed. Harmful and adverse narratives will always be flaunted as a fast efficient strategy for obtaining power and control but ultimately, they come at a steep cost. However it’s not always the enemy, but it must always be carefully managed. Promoting media literacy, restoring institutional accountability, and creating dialogue across divides are essential to maintaining democracy for as long as possible. In the constant stream of black and white images, we as individuals must learn to see in colour.
Comments