Week 7 Synchronous Session
Dr. Singleton spoke of conspiracy theory as a labelled, plausible and ideological reinforcement of sense making. And how the more scholarly and academic presentation of authoritative truth moves a perception from one of a lone nut in the basement to one of more communal credibility. But to those in communities of conspiracy, their lived experience is still one of truth for them and others like them. To what extent do conspiracy theories act as a social bonding agent for those looking to connect with like-minded others, who are not finding ‘their people’ by more conventional means? Does the conspiracy itself act as a glue between people, hardening when challenged?
Centralized issues of the erosion of civil liberties, surveillance and corporate influence abound in American conspiracy theory. But they also create ideological division and disagreement in what it means to be American. But what if such sense-making theories were more reflective than divisive? Do you think such behavior, uncomfortable as it may be, is more revealing of a restless curiosity inherent in American culture? Is conspiracy curiosity itself an American value?
Our discussion explored ideas of the hard binary of absolute good vs. absolute evil in conspiracy theory, and the divisive role of othering which rushes in when there is a lack of transparency around an unfolding event. We see this in the polarized current events in Gaza as much as the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. In conspiracy’s attempts at sense-making, prejudice is reinforced while credibility dispels but also propagates misinformation. How is conspiracy’s sense-making different from the sense-making of journalism, and where do they converge and diverge online?
