Reviews for Fog Facts: Searching for Truth in the Land of Spin

The average rating for Fog Facts: Searching for Truth in the Land of Spin based on 2 reviews is 4 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2019-07-12 00:00:00 Donta Johnson Packs a wallop Novelist and very sharp social commentator Larry Beinhart's main premise in this somewhat breezy but always incisive book is that the truth is right in front of our eyes but we are unable to see it because it is obscured by a prevailing fog of lies and misinformation. He notes, for example, that the truth about Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to Al Qaeda and the weapons of mass destruction that weren't there, and especially the disaster that was likely to follow if we invaded Iraq, was known, available and understood, but unfortunately buried on page three or four of the New York Times or in an academic tome or on some obscure Website or beneath the radar of the six o'clock news so that your average person (especially your average congressperson) didn't know about it. Besides they (and we) were watching Fox News, which was putting "the news in context," was giving "it a perspective," was telling us "how to think about the stories" it reported. In fact, as Beinhart so incisively notes, Fox News was and is doing us "a service" because even if Fox News has it wrong, "for many of their viewers it is still more satisfying than the conventional, non-judgmental approach that leaves the audience with work to do." (p. 182) This sort of incisive understanding of what is really going on is part of what makes this little book such a fantastic read. Beinhart sees things in a way that others do not. He sees past the spin and the hype and the conventional wisdom to what is really going on--or has gone on. He sees that what has propelled the right to power in this country and has persuaded its leaders to embrace hypocrisy and authoritarianism is a belief by many that "the source of order is authority" and that hypocritical lies are often necessary to maintain that order. He recalls that George W. Bush "mocked Vice President Al Gore for acknowledging marijuana use, saying, "Baby boomers have got to grow up and say, yeah, I may have done drugs, but instead of admitting it, say to kids, don't do them." (p. 96) This "Bush logic" in part explains why he and his administration spew out so many lies and so much misinformation. Quite simply, Bush believes lies and secrecy are good policy. The general public are like children. They should not be told the truth lest it misguide them or confuse them. Beinhart asserts that hypocrisy and mendacity are in fact part of the Republican Party's program and have "a great deal [to] do with its appeal." (p. 96) The idea is we like being lied to, or at least we believe that other people--the unwashed masses probably--need to be lied to, and this can only be done effectively if the lies come from authority figures. Order is made by authority. "A choice, a statement, or a rule is not made valid by logic or proof or evidence. It comes from the authority of the source." (p. 96) Of course the real authority in the world is empirical fact as understood by rationality and by the sciences, not just the hard sciences, but the social, political and economic sciences as well, and by technology. Beinhart notes that the split between those who follow "the constellation of Republicanism, conservatism, and Christianity" (p. 96) and the rest of us is "not between right and left but between the faith-based and reality-based communities." (p. 181) I think Beinhart has got it right. The Bush administration and its supporters, in following a faith-based way of dealing with the world and its problems, are in reality applying an ignorance-based approach that will inevitably lead to the end of America as the world's leading economic, technological and scientific power. Unless we find a way to navigate through the lies and misinformation spun out by the right wing "noise machine" we are headed for not only a further loss in power and prestige, but a lowered standard of living that will inevitably result from that loss. The question might be, why has the culture of mendacity and faith-based authority taken over so much of America? In Europe and elsewhere people are amazed at our growing stupidity. Beinhart blames the media in part. He writes that "since 9/11...there no longer seem to be any consequences for political lying." This is because the media fails to report the lies as lies. "The failure of the media to take responsibility is the reason that political lying--especially in the soft-core, public relations style that misleads--has no penalties anymore." (p. 185) Part of this book is devoted to exposing George W. Bush for what he is, a mediocre opportunist who is clever at manipulating people and spinning events in a way that benefits him. He avoided service in Vietnam, but nobody seemed to notice as he now struts around like a war hero. His various business enterprises were failures. They lost money. But Bush himself did not lose money, mainly because he was the son of prominent political family that included his father who was the President of the United States. He got cheapie loans and bailouts and favorable insider trading decisions from the SEC so that when he ran for governor of Texas he was already a rich man. Beinhart also looks into the past of Vice President Dick Cheney and his association with Halliburton. It is in part a picture of a scheming politician corrupt to the core. But mainly Beinhart looks into the fog. It's dense and thick and, for now, it prevails. --Dennis Littrell, author of the mystery novel, "Teddy and Teri"

Review # 2 was written on 2017-06-13 00:00:00 Richard Branch Mostly concentrated on tearing down the Bush administration, I was expecting more shocking or rather, unexpected knowledge that has slipped under the table in recent years. While I personally enjoyed the analysis that media played on hiding certain pieces of information and how it relayed facts and twisted it one way or the other, it was hard to pinpoint what the actual purpose of the book was. It's very hard to rebut any of the authors key points but it felt, scattered. A lot of long analogies were used and though useful to make a point, as a reader one lost track of what the purpose of the analogy was, once it went on for more than two pages.