A Former Disinformation Reporter is Running The Onion. Plus, Birds ARE Real.
50:49 Share

Former Trump White House advisor Steve Bannon has been ordered to report to prison on July 1st. With InfoWars facing liquidation and the Epoch Times under investigation, it's been a rough week for the pro-Trump media.

From WNYC in New York, this is On the Media. I'm Michael Loewentrout. Also on this week's show, how birds aren't real, a completely made-up conspiracy theory became a worldwide phenomenon. They describe eating turkey at Christmas and Thanksgiving as ritualized bird worship, part of an elaborate propaganda effort by the U.S. government to inure us to the bird surveillance.

Plus, a journalist gives up the disinformation beat to buy a satirical fake news site, The Onion. You're now a suit, Ben. Yeah, that's right. Is it complicated? Is it easy? You can't say this, but I'm in two tuxedos right now. It's one tuxedo inside of another tuxedo. It's all coming up after this.

On the Media is supported by BetterHelp. Halloween is the season when we start to see people wearing masks and costumes, but sometimes it can feel like we wear a mask and hide more often than we want to, like at our jobs, at work, or around our friends and family. Therapy can help you learn to accept all parts of yourself so you can take off the mask, because masks should be used for Halloween celebrations, not for our emotions.

If you're thinking of starting therapy, give BetterHelp a try. It's entirely online, designed to be convenient, flexible, and suited to your schedule.

Therapy can arm you with the tools you need to live your best life, helping you learn things like positive coping mechanisms and setting effective boundaries. Just fill out a brief questionnaire to get matched with a licensed therapist and switch therapists anytime for no additional charge. Visit betterhelp.com slash OTM today to get 10% off your first month. That's betterhelp, H-E-L-P dot com slash OTM.

This episode is brought to you by Progressive. Most of you aren't just listening right now. You're driving, cleaning, and even exercising. But what if you could be saving money by switching to Progressive?

Drivers who save by switching save nearly $750 on average, and auto customers qualify for an average of seven discounts. Multitask right now. Quote today at Progressive.com. Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. National average 12-month savings of $744 by new customers surveyed who saved with Progressive between June 2022 and May 2023. Potential savings will vary. Discounts not available in all states and situations. ♪

James Baldwin is one of those writers who commands respect as well as love and affection. He was born 100 years ago this year. I'm Razia Iqbal. Join me for Notes on a Native Son, a special series from Notes from America with Ta-Nehisi Coates, Bryan Stevenson, Nikki Giovanni, and many others discussing their favorite passages by Baldwin. Listen to new episodes every Saturday in the Notes from America feed wherever you get your podcasts.

Listener supported. WNYC Studios. From WNYC in New York, this is On The Media. I'm Brooke Gladstone. And I'm Michael Loewinger. Last week was a rough one for GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump.

And this week, the gavel came down on some of his most ardent supporters in the right-wing media. We've just learned that former Trump White House adviser Steve Bannon has been ordered to report to prison on July 1st. This comes nearly two years after the trial in which Bannon was convicted for defying the January 6th committee's subpoena for documents and testimony.

Four days earlier. Lawyers for the families of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting filed an emergency motion asking a bankruptcy judge to liquidate conspiracy theorist Alex Jones Media Company. Jones lost two lawsuits and was ordered to pay one and a half billion dollars to the families of victims of the Sandy Hook School shooting. Jones falsely called the deadly shooting a hoax.

Alex Jones during an InfoWars livestream last Saturday. On Thursday, Jones agreed to liquidate his personal assets, giving up ownership of InfoWars.

Meanwhile, as of late April, another pro-Trump outlet, the Gateway Pundit, is facing a similar struggle. A far-right blog that spread the conspiracy theory that Denver-based Dominion voting systems rigged the 2020 election is now filing for bankruptcy. And then on Monday, the DOJ came after another pro-Trump outlet, the Epoch Times, a mysterious media operation run by the Falun Gong, a Chinese dissident group. The Epoch Times.

The financial officer behind the Epoch Times has been indicted on allegations of a massive money laundering scheme. One of the details of the indictment was that the team in the Epoch Times that was committing these crimes was called the Make Money Online team. Ben Smith of Semaphore speaking on the Breaking Points podcast. It does seem like finally someone has discovered how to make money online.

Back in 2019, ahead of the last presidential election, but before its alleged fraud scheme began, NBC reported that the Epoch Times had flooded Facebook with pro-Trump ads. The Epoch Times has spent more than $1.5 million on 11,000 pro-Trump advertisements in the last six months alone. That is more than any organization outside the Trump campaign itself

even more than most Democratic presidential candidates have spent on their own campaigns. If you're over 50 on Facebook, you probably got one of these ads. Ben Collins, who co-wrote that 2019 Epoch Times report, speaking here on MSNBC. In fact, you may have gotten them the mail. They send out physical mailers talking about the deep state and talking about how Hillary Clinton is part of a cabal sort of taking over the government. Over his nine plus years as a reporter at the Daily Beast and then NBC News,

Ben Collins helped define the disinformation beat with his reporting on right-wing media personalities, including the ones we just heard about. But in April, Collins announced he was leaving journalism and the disinfo beat to run a fake news outlet.

perhaps the most famous of them all. The Onion, that satirical news site that publishes headlines like, winner didn't even know it was pie eating contest, has new owners. In his first job in a media C-suite, Collins is responsible for the very thing that the site's old owners at GeoMedia failed to do, make money online. Ben, welcome back to the show. Thanks for having me, Mike.

First off, give us a sense of how you got onto the disinformation beat in the first place.

Yeah, so I was at the Daily Beast and I was mostly covering stupid internet stuff, basically. Like what? A good example of this is one time there were these guys who realized that Facebook events were really big in the algorithm on Facebook. And they decided to create a fake Limp Bizkit concert on 420 at the Sunoco station in Dayton, Ohio. The creator went into great detail to fool people. He created the flyer.

even came up with fake tickets and a fictional seating chart. Again, it's a hoax. There's no concert at the Sunoco gas station. - Poor Sunoco station, they were calling it that day and they were like, "Please just stop coming." The internet sort of consumed culture entirely, but mainstream media was really late to catch on because they thought it was this cute fad. They thought it was like the Tamagotchi or something.

And to be fair, I don't think I was particularly early to it. I was just one of the early people to take it seriously. And the reason I started really taking it seriously, tragic and weird and awful. My friend from college, Chris Hurst, we hosted, funnily enough, a radio show together where we talked about baseball, I think. Like a college radio show. Like a college radio show. Got it.

His fiance was shot and killed on live TV in Roanoke, Virginia. This is in 2015. This guy live-streamed the murder. He had a GoPro on his head. It was truly awful. And in the weeks after that, a bunch of ghouls went after him. People online went after your friend Chris.

Yeah, they said that Chris was a CIA plant or that Allison didn't really exist. You know, all of these horrible things. And they did it because it would get you to the top of YouTube. It would get you to the top of Google search results. This was before the word disinformation kind of flew around. So I could just report freely on this. I could just call these people, all these conspiracy theorists and

they would just talk at me for half an hour. At the end of it, I would just be like, "Just letting you know, I know you think that my friend, you know, is part of the cabal, but if he's in the CAA, he sucks at it, and, you know, he has terrible baseball takes."

Wait, how do people respond to that? Back then, it was jarring to me to hear this, but now it's very normal to hear this. They would say, oh, it's just what I believe. Like, I'm sorry if that's true, but it's just what I believe. It's the total dehumanization, the idea that these people can't actually be people, creating individual human beings to turn into case studies that you then...

blow out into the reason everything is wrong in the world. Tell me how you ended up doing this same beat for NBC News. Everyone felt something fishy going on in 2016. And we had heard, obviously, there was a Russian troll farm doing stuff, right? There was an account called 10GOP. It confused a Trump rally for a Cleveland Cavaliers victory parade.

No one took a second to wonder why everyone was wearing maroon. So this guy named Kevin Paulson, who once was indicted for doing some hacking at some point in his life, he found that all of the accounts on Facebook were basically deleted around the same time. And we were able to reverse engineer which of the accounts came from St. Petersburg, the Russian troll accounts. And that wasn't enough, obviously. We had to pressure Facebook and Congress into releasing the information they had. And that got the attention of NBC News. And I was like,

Well, if you want a person who's really good at this, we should bring over Brandi Zdrozny, who's the best reporter I've ever met in my life.

I kind of said that offhand as a way to be like, you don't have to hire me. And they did. They brought us both on. And from there, we really started covering the economics and all the pain and physical real life suffering that comes from pretending to be something on the internet and spreading lies. There was a moment where I feel like the disinfo beat was kind of the hot thing in media. And arguably misinformation, disinformation are as present as ever.

And yet it feels like the interest in covering and discussing these topics have lost their glow, at least a little bit. I'm thinking of that piece in 2021 in Harper's by Joe Bernstein, who now writes for The New York Times.

You know the one I'm talking about, Bad News? Yeah, I do. In which he describes, quote, a new field of knowledge production that emerged during the Trump years at the juncture of media, academia, and policy research, what he calls big disinfo. And he points to this phenomenon around that time in 2021, where you had people like Katie Couric co-chairing Aspen Institute's nonpartisan, quote, unquote, Commission on Information Disorder,

And I remember Barack Obama gave a speech at Stanford the next year about how disinformation was getting in the way of fixing what ails America. I'm convinced that right now, one of the biggest impediments to doing all of this, indeed one of the biggest reasons for democracy's weakening,

is the profound change that's taken place in how we communicate and consume information. And I think what I saw as kind of a salient critique was that in a sort of centrist establishment, there was a belief that our political project is sound and good. It's simply that lies and liars cloud people from seeing that.

Did you see that? I don't know. It was like a New York Times thing today. It was a guy who said he was leaning towards Biden because Donald Trump wasn't like an effective enough criminal to get away with paying a porn star, right? Like the minds of voters are hilarious. Like people have really weird motivations for doing things. And maybe one of those weird motivations is kind of cool and interesting. I don't know. But I think tying that to disinformation reporting is,

is a fool's errand. I mean, clearly, there were grifty people who co-opted the thing, try to sell a conference or something. But the work itself is really important, man. I'm always going to stand up for that. I think that's good stuff. That's really good. Why'd you leave NBC, ultimately? It was a lot, man. Like, if you wake up first thing in the morning and you look at, like, a Nazi message board, you're like,

It's a tough way to live. Initially, I put in my notice and I started writing a book about all of the people who had manipulated our media over the last 10 years through the internet. And it was making me really sad. And then I saw that The Onion was for sale. And I just started making some phone calls. And I don't know, the light was back. You could sort of see the light again. And that was really good. Why The Onion? I grew up with it. And it was the most important website of my time. And...

Not just website, newspaper. Do you remember the physical newspaper? I do. Yes, I used to get it on the street for free. It was just jokes in a paper. But yeah, I grew up with it and I just really didn't want it to die the death that I kept seeing. Like a lot of these sites were being turned into AI content farms or being bought by people for larger projects.

And I just wanted to keep it as is because I just think they've been the most right newspaper. Right in what way? The Iraq war started on my brother's 18th birthday. Literally, that was the day. Seven days later, they printed this headline. It was a point counterpoint. It said, this war will destabilize the entire Mideast region and set off a global shockwave of anti-Americanism versus, no, it won't. It's like, it's a perfect deadline.

And this was even pre-Dixie Chicks, fervent Freedom Fries time, right? And they didn't care. They knew they were seeing through something really profound. And that just never stopped. Here's a good headline about AI. This is from June of last year when everyone was full panic, like the robots are going to eat us all or whatever. The headline is, guy who sucks at being a person sees huge potential in AI. Perfect. Sorry, listener who likes AI. Yeah, sure. Yeah.

The onions vary back to basics. It's just been so refreshing. A refrain that we often hear from journalists in this current collapse of the media economy is that the C-suites in charge of managing the money at these outlets are just mucking it up for everyone. That running a media outlet shouldn't be complicated, and yet the suits make it so. You're now a suit, Ben. Yeah, that's right. Is it complicated? Is it easy?

You can't say this, but I'm in two tuxedos right now. It's one tuxedo inside of another tuxedo. Look, it's complicated in a different way than I think that they present it. I do think that there is this thin layer of, you know, when I was at NBC, I used to call it like the Game of Thrones layer, where there's this constant infighting among a bunch of executives over their section of the company or whatever. And it has nothing to do with journalism. I don't think that needs to exist straight up.

And in part of taking over this thing, I just wanted to get out of the way. The Onion has this truly impeccable editorial process. Protecting that to me is incredibly important. My goal is to make it so that work can get bigger and better. That to me is the goal of what an executive should do in this situation. I don't think it should be like bicker about your reporters or whatever. I say this because I'm very fresh. Obviously, I've been in this role for less than two months.

In two years when I'm in some ridiculous scandal where I'm aggressively yelling at a reporter on Glenn Beck's podcast, I take it all back. But I do think that there's a place for this in the world. Do you think there's something that satire can do or accomplish political journalism can't or isn't equipped to do?

Yeah, it's completely unbeholden, right? You're allowed to go after people in power. In fact, you're expected to. For example, there's a really good headline from last year that I always think about. And that's when I realized that this is a really good time to run this place. It said, it is journalism's sacred duty to endanger the lives of as many trans people as possible. This is when... I remember this one going around.

And The Onion is just allowed to say, actually, one side has really, totally co-opted this conversation for political points. I think that they are uniquely equipped for the future.

The new owner of The Onion, Jeff Lawson, said this after the purchase. The Onion's success is based on something different than most media companies. The Onion has been stifled, along with most of the internet, by Byzantine cookie dialogues, paywalls, bizarro belly fat ads, and clickbait. The internet sucks, and it's time we made it better. So my question for you, Ben, is The Onion...

profitable? And if not, do you feel like you have a handle on the journey to make it profitable?

There's this thing called programmatic advertising, where if you see a weird ad on the internet, right, this, if you put an onion in your sock, your pancreatic cancer will be cured or whatever. That is the secret driver of a lot of money on the internet. It's sort of how journalism got into this space to begin with this, this never ending chase for clicks that can provide a new series of those ads that if you see them even for a second, you're like, oh, my God, this is a weird ad.

you get a fraction of a penny and that fraction of a penny adds up. That was basically journalism business model for the last 15 years. We're going to have better ads. We're going to have non-programmatic, non-belly fat ads. That's one thing. But then, you know, we're going to do some membership stuff. And then there's other stuff we want to do. We want to do more video stuff. We want to do stuff that the staff wants to make. We'll find a way to monetize it in a way that makes sense.

So I heard in there, make great content, sell better ads, hopefully get people to subscribe to something. And if we do it right, we think it's going to be profitable.

Yeah, we have a good plan for it. Part of the reason I'm being cagey is because I want to let the staff talk about all the stuff they've been cooking up. They're pretty excited about it. It's funny to me, Ben. You went from literally covering, for lack of a better term, fake news, to now running the fake news site, the most famous one of them all, basically. How does that make sense?

When I started on this beat, Disinfo beat back in the day was just to cover all the dumb stuff that was happening. And there was a lot of joy in it. It was chaos and it was people messing around and having fun. And that messing around and having fun got economized by the worst people in the world, man. And reclaiming that is important. I realized this early in the year. I could sit around all day and just keep reporting on all the new cast of

Ben, thank you very much. Yeah, man, thank you. Ben Collins is CEO of The Onion.

Coming up, birds aren't real. I got proof. So who are you going to believe? This is On The Media. On The Media.

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Whether you love true crime or comedy, celebrity interviews or news, you call the shots on what's in your podcast queue. And guess what? Now you can call them on your auto insurance too with the Name Your Price tool from Progressive. It works just the way it sounds. You tell Progressive how much you want to pay for car insurance and they'll show you coverage options that fit your budget. Get your quote today at Progressive.com to join the over 28 million drivers who trust Progressive.

Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. Price and coverage match limited by state law.

Only 116 people in all of history can say what it's like to be a Supreme Court justice. On the next Notes from America, we will meet one. I'm Kai Wright. Join me for a conversation with Associate Justice Katonji Brown-Jackson, the first ever Black woman to serve on the court. We'll talk about the generation of civil rights fighters who raised her, what SCOTUS means in this moment, and her passions, not only for the law, but for Broadway. That's next time. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.

This is On The Media. I'm Michael Loewinger. And I'm Brooke Gladstone. And be advised, birds aren't real. Birds aren't real!

Well, New at 10, an Arkansas-based group called the Birds Aren't Real Movement marched through downtown Springfield today to give one message. Birds are not real. The group believes all the birds in the United States have been killed by the government and have been replaced by government drones used to spy on the American people. The proof that birds are robots is all around us if you start looking. For starters, birds charge their batteries on power lines so they can refuel up high and they can watch the civilians, you know.

Do you need more evidence? I can really go all day up here. Who here has seen a baby pigeon? You haven't, have you? It's weird. There's all these adult pigeons. Where are all the babies?

They come out of the factory as adults. That's Peter McIndoe in 2023 giving a TED Talk. As a teenager, he founded the Birds Aren't Real movement. It was a joke, but he rarely broke character. And this year, he published a book with his comrade in conspiracy, Conor Gatos, called Birds Aren't Real, the true story of mass avian murder and the largest surveillance campaign in U.S. history.

The vast following they've amassed along the way found something satisfying in joining with McIndoe, wrote critic Ian Peacock, in cosplaying the paranoid. Birds Aren't Real, he observed in a recent New Republic piece, delivers a knowing satire of American conspiratorial thinking in the century of QAnon to a generation desperately in need of one.

It seems McIndoe offered an antic port in a lunatic storm. He's described himself as having been seen as kind of a black sheep among his friends at high school. Ian Becock. Because he questioned, you know, beliefs that, for instance, President Obama was the Antichrist or that vaccines were part of a surveillance conspiracy.

He was 17 or 18, I believe, in 2017. And he was in Memphis with his friends for a women's march. And on a whim, he scrawled these three words, birds aren't real, on a piece of cardboard as a kind of mock protest sign. Somebody took a video of it and uploaded it to social media.

And it rapidly went viral, especially among teens in the South. From there, he built it out into a full-blown online movement. They show up in comment sections. They post infographics. A recent video that they posted was of a number of bird truthers at the Duolingo headquarters, the language learning app. I brought you here today to protest the demon abomination that is the Duolingo bird!

Peter has also given media interviews on Fox News. When he goes on Fox News, is he taken seriously? In all of his media interviews, with one notable exception, he is entirely in character. When he's on Fox News, there's an interview he does with Jesse Waters, and he's entirely in character. And Waters asks at one point, is this a bit? Is this a schtick? Do you really in your heart? Why would it be a schtick?

Because there are birds everywhere. You report on UFOs in the show, yes? I can see the government using some birds maybe as drones to disguise them, but you're saying all birds, the pigeons here in New York City. Every, every bird, every bird in every pigeon here in New York City. I mean, it's a piece of performance art, really. The followers of this movement, they know it's fake, right?

My overall impression is that, yes, the young people involved are in on the joke. So their new book was written entirely in character. What does it contain? A revisionist history of the second half of the 20th century in the United States, purportedly drawing on stolen confidential documents with descriptions of how presidents all the way through up until Joe Biden have been involved in perpetuating this plot.

You can find diagrams of all the different kinds of bird surveillance drones, from geese, which are supposedly used for crowd control in parks, and I think that resonates with many of us, to hummingbirds, which are used for assassinations. Alan Dulles, the first civilian CIA director, apparently hatched the plot to exterminate all the birds and replace them, and that was the reason for Kennedy's assassination? Yes.

Yes, when John F. Kennedy becomes president and learns about this project and starts digging into it a little bit, they have a fake memo from Dulles to JFK saying, we do a number of things and not one of them is your business. Go fiddle around with your little space program and leave the big things to us. The suggestion in the book is that JFK was killed by a modified hummingbird surveillance drone.

And the US invasion of Vietnam? Part of the theory of everything that is offered by the bird conspiracy. So the invasion of Vietnam in this case is explained as a search for bauxite, a rare earth mineral that is important for building bird drones. Okay. So you've mentioned in passing the theory of everything. The theory of everything is where there are these airtight logical systems that are produced in which everything can be explained either away or as part of the system.

And psychologists have found this need for cognitive closure associated with conspiratorial thinking as well as anxiety and even authoritarianism. There's another quality of conspiracy that you've observed in real life and in The Birds Aren't Real conspiracy, and it's called the argument by adjacency.

We see this a lot around COVID skepticism and QAnon, the selection and elevation of facts that are in fact generally accepted and presenting them as proof of much wilder claims. So for instance, the authors of the book invite you to do your own research into the bird genocide plot.

And what you find is that, of course, the U.S. did spend the Cold War running a number of secret operations around the world and at home, from coups abroad to surveillance of civil rights leaders. They also point out that we live in a moment in which all of our personal data is online and is being harvested for profit or for surveillance purposes.

And so if these things are true, it seems not that implausible that an elaborate system of bird drone surveillance might have evolved as part of this as well. Successful conspiracies, you say, perform a kind of psychic alchemy for their followers. What do you mean by that?

So there's a kind of psychic bargain with conspiracy theories. On the one hand, they often have the effect of draining pleasure from everyday life. Because everything is encompassed within this elaborate plot, nothing can be innocent anymore. The stakes are too high. So what we find with QAnon supporters is that they pull away from friends and family where they are convinced that the people that they love have become cultists and enemies.

You see this in Birds Aren't Real as well, where taking a nature walk, bird watching, you know, none of this is innocent. In fact, they describe eating turkey at Christmas and Thanksgiving as ritualized bird worship, an elaborate propaganda effort by the U.S. government to inure us to the bird surveillance.

So on the one hand, you know, pleasure is drained out of everyday life, but that's replaced by a kind of heroism that is offered to followers. You have an important role to play to help bring back real birds to America. To raise awareness and in some cases to use magnets to take down surveillance drones and deactivate them. They take this joke really seriously and yet.

You've observed that the progenitor of this has recently dropped character, clarified that it's a joke, and expressed concern about the risk of doing stuff like this, that it can lead people down the rabbit hole.

Yeah, so if you look on the social media accounts of Birds Aren't Real at the moment, you will find claims that in fact birds are real, that the founder of the movement, Peter McIndoe, has died. But he hasn't. He hasn't, not to my knowledge. With the publication of the book, it seems online like the movement is sort of bringing the chapter to an end. But in 2023, Peter McIndoe gave a TED Talk where he dropped character and explained what he was trying to achieve.

I do not actually believe that birds are robots. This is a character that I played for four years, the leader of a fake movement with fake evidence and a fake history. Our goal was to convince the public that our satirical movement was a real one.

and see if the media would believe what we were saying. But he's also explained it is to offer a more complicated understanding of who believes in movements like this and why, and to recognize it not so much as a problem of truth and belief, but a problem of belonging. Yeah, you say that...

Another crucial component of any thriving conspiracy is despair. Writing this piece, I looked at wonderful books by Will Sommer at the Washington Post and Mike Rothschild on QAnon. And what really struck me reading these descriptions and interviews with people who were very involved in the QAnon movement is just the profound sense of despair and in some cases isolation in their lives. And folks who have issues with debt or medical problems in their family and really feeling abandoned

And when you look at, you know, Trump rallies or COVID protests, these are clearly fun for people who are attending them. There's a real sense of enthusiasm and exuberance. And I think what you see with Birds Aren't Real, of course, there's the language that this is a heroic group effort to reveal the truth about birds. But you can also find in interviews of young people who are part of the movement, a description of the same kind of psychic dynamics where young people today have

grown up entirely online, and many of them have gone to high school and college during a very isolating pandemic experience where everything was remote. And so the ability to be part of something online, to come to rallies, has also given that sense of meaning and community, even though it is a joke. You mentioned a concept that Francis Fukuyama wrote in his much maligned bestseller, 1992, The End of History and the Last Man.

One of the claims he makes in the book is that political and social change is actually driven not by economic conditions, but actually by psychological motivations. And he talks about this concept of thumos, T-H-Y-M-O-S, which he describes as recognition, the desire to be understood and valued.

I mean, I think we have seen that towards the end of the 20th century and in the last couple of decades, that this desire to be recognized and feel like life is meaningful can continue to drive political change, even in the absence of grand ideology. When McIndoo gave that TED Talk back in 2023, he said he wanted to give young people a way to respond to chaos.

and he described it as trying to build an igloo in a snowstorm.

to, as he put it, create shelter out of the same type of material that's causing the chaos and give people a sheltered, safe, protected space to process all of this misinformation and chaos around them rather than succumbing to it. It's a response to the criticism that the movement has faced, which is that this might be contributing to the problem. Yet another conspiracy theory online.

yet another pathway into this kind of thinking. But he has suggested, I think quite persuasively, that it's this collaborative effort to take the pieces of this problem and turn them into something more constructive. He's a smart kid. He is. He's worth listening to, I think.

What does the movement tell us about the ways we can go about fighting misinformation? I know one of them is information literacy, teaching critical thinking skills. I think all of these rational efforts to fight misinformation are necessary but not sufficient. From my own research into misinformation, among Gen Zers in particular, we find, first of all, it's not a single person sitting down and confronting a single piece of information and trying to decide if it's true or not.

Very often what's happening is that this information is being encountered socially, whether that's in comment sections or on TikTok or Instagram, in full view of other people, in conversation with friends. So like all of us, sometimes we consume information and we try to decide whether it's true or not. But there are many other times when we look at the news or engage with information and we're trying to decide, you know, what do I think about this? What does that say about me? What does that say about the community that I'm part of?

And so the purpose of consuming information in many cases is social. In your piece, you cited historian Richard Hofstadter's famous essay in the mid-60s about the paranoid style in American politics. And he said, the paranoid mind is nothing if not scholarly in technique.

You know, one of the most impressive things about the paranoid style is what he calls the contrast between its fantasied conclusions and the almost touching concern with factuality it invariably shows. That sounds very familiar to me. And when you think of the work by Crystal Lee at MIT writing about how COVID deniers online are teaching one another how to read statistics and produce visualizations, you know, we put a lot of effort into information literacy and teaching critical thinking. I think it's really essential.

But this just suggests to me that it's not quite enough because it's kind of value neutral. It can be used for different purposes and to take you down different directions. You mused that perhaps rationality's greatest weakness is that it is a procedure more than a commitment. That teaching people critical thinking and rational arguments the easy part, it's much harder to establish and defend the shared values that reason is meant to serve.

And you said that the Birds Aren't Real movement tapped into the broader challenge that we face when our shared reality and consensus are unraveling.

The fact that this is not purely a question of rationality and belief. What we learn here from Birds Aren't Real is that addressing these underlying psychological dimensions of social and political life are just as important as giving people the skills to decipher fact from fiction. You know, one of the things that has changed since 2017 when Peter McIndoo began this, I mean, we had the Trump presidency, we had COVID, but

But we've also had the emergence now of AI and large language models, which is having profound implications for online misinformation. The capabilities of AI to produce deepfake videos or text, it's almost impossible now to tell the difference. And so, you know, technology companies are looking at watermarks and these other ways of helping us differentiate information.

We're going to run to limits when we focus on teaching skills just because the technology has evolved. And so focusing on, you know, what does it mean to give people a sense of purpose and community and respond to isolation and loneliness feels to me just as important and maybe relevant now as the focus on teaching skills and rationality. And so much harder. And so much harder. Yeah.

One last question. How did the Birds Aren't Real movement reconcile the abundance of pigeon guano? They do have an answer for that.

That's in fact a way of tracking human targets by the U.S. government. And it's a way of signaling, whether it falls on a person or on their car, that they are in fact a person of interest. And so that too is bound up in the theory of everything that Birds Aren't Real is able to offer. It's quite an impressive achievement, in fact. I'll say, Ian, thank you so much.

This was such a pleasure, Brooke. Thank you. Ian Peacock is a writer and critic and frequent contributor to The New Republic. His recent piece is Birds Aren't Real, the prank that turned misinformation on its head. Coming up, psychological warfare and the American mind. This is On the Media. On the Media.

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Whether you love true crime or comedy, celebrity interviews or news, you call the shots on what's in your podcast queue. And guess what? Now you can call them on your auto insurance too with the Name Your Price tool from Progressive. It works just the way it sounds. You tell Progressive how much you want to pay for car insurance and they'll show you coverage options that fit your budget. Get your quote today at Progressive.com to join the over 28 million drivers who trust Progressive.

Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. Price and coverage match limited by state law. This is On the Media. I'm Michael Loewinger. And I'm Brooke Gladstone. The thing both real news and so-called fake news have in common is that they're shared mostly in the form of stories. And since stories create narratives that can shape our entire worldview, in the war over truth and lies, stories are weapons.

That's why Anna Lee Newitz's new history of the use of narrative to win or to intimidate hearts and minds here and abroad is called Stories Are Weapons, Psychological Warfare in the American Mind.

It's a wide-ranging account extending back some 2,500 years to the progenitor of psyops, the Chinese philosopher Sun Tzu, who said, "One need not destroy one's enemy. One need only destroy his willingness to engage."

Then the book takes us through the proto-psyops used by Benjamin Franklin during the Revolutionary War and our government's deployment of deception during the Indian Wars and the First World War and the Second, right up to the culture wars of the present moment.

Newitz, a seasoned writer of both nonfiction and science fiction, depicts the idea of psyops with a broad brush as a kind of noxious world-building and clearly identifies its first modern master as...

the man who professionalized the practice in the U.S. military as one Paul Linebarger. He was a scholar who studied Asian history but was also deeply involved in military intelligence during World War II.

He had immersed himself in the philosophies of Sun Tzu. And when the army called on him to write the very first manual on psychological warfare for the U.S. Army, he really borrowed a lot of Sun Tzu's ideas. The notion that psychological war is a bid for peace because you can use trickery or misdirection to avoid success.

violent war that leads to mass death. But at the same time, of course, he would have been aware that psyops had been around for thousands of years. It wasn't necessarily a form of progress. It was

actually just built into the structure of total war, that you always want to have weaponized messages to demoralize your enemy and soften them up. Yeah. Lambarger was born in 1913. He died in 1966. But in that relatively short time, he lived several lives, one of which was

was as Cord Wainer Smith, a prolific and acclaimed science fiction writer who, you say, worked out a lot of his ideas in those stories. In his book, Psychological Warfare, he writes that a good psychological weapon is entertaining and engaging. And in his science fiction, he has a lot of stories that deal with things like

psychic powers or using propaganda to overwhelm an enemy.

What's your favorite Cordwainer Smith slash Linebarger story? Well, I'm a big fan of Mother Hitton's Little Kittens. There's a character who's trying to steal life-extending drugs from a futuristic nation called Northstrilia. And he's coming into Earth in a spaceship. What Northstrilia has developed is a kind of PSYOP atomic bomb. They've bred these...

very angry minks

so angry that they have to be kept sedated. And when they want to fight off an enemy, they wake up all of their minks, attach their minds to this amplifier, and shoot all of their angry mink thoughts into the mind of their adversary. The adversary, overwhelmed with these angry animalistic thoughts, actually eats himself to death. I think that what he was getting at was...

If we can create a weaponized message powerful enough, we can cause the enemy to destroy themselves rather than attacking us. That's a really big part of how PSYOPs work, especially today. Line Barger talks about a PSYOP from World War II where the Japanese military was trying to scare U.S. troops in the Philippines. Yes.

had a big effect on him. They were just dropping flyers, right? The Japanese military created these little flyers that said, warning, in jungles, poisonous snakes are rampant. And it claimed to be a flyer from the U.S. military. When soldiers got that,

It immediately, of course, undermined their morale because they thought that their own people were telling them, we're sending you into this incredibly dangerous place and you might die from these hidden poisonous snakes. But the other piece of it, really the world building piece, is that because soldiers thought it was from their own commanders, if they went to their commanders and said, what the heck is this? The commanders would say, we didn't send that, this snake.

confusion, the sense that maybe your commander was lying to you, that was the perfect way to make people feel like they didn't want to fight the war anymore. We talked about science fiction and the military psyop. How about the ad industry and psychology? So during World War I, there was a big overlap between people who were interested in crafting advertising messages and people who were propagandizing on behalf of the U.S. government.

And after the war was over, that relationship really continued. By the time that Linebarger is writing his manual, he is basically borrowing language from marketing. And the U.S. military still uses that exact language. They talk about targeting an audience with a PSYOP. And a PSYOP is called a product within the military. Hmm.

And so it's really the same process. It's knowing your audience. It's knowing what they secretly desire and crafting a message to kind of tickle that desire before you deliver your message. And the message could be surrender to the United States or surrender to your urge to shop at Amazon. Long before it was professionalized, you say Benjamin Franklin did it with newspapers. Yes.

So he created this newspaper under the intentionally bland name of the Supplement to the Boston Independent Chronicle. Not a real paper, but it sounds real. Again, it's a great deep fake. And he wrote every single story in it. He made up a bunch of

personal accounts by soldiers who claim to have witnessed war crimes being committed by the Seneca military on behalf of the British. What he really wanted to do was undermine the British public's faith in their government's efforts to continue holding on to the United States as an asset. And he wrote that the Seneca military was scalping innocent women and children and sending the scalps up to Canada, where they would then be sent back to England.

And talk about world building. There were very gory descriptions of putting the scalps in different boxes. So you'd get a box of children's scalps and a box of women's scalps.

It was really effective because it felt like, you know, how could those details be made up? And the stories did indeed undermine British faith in this war, but also U.S. newspapers started republishing them. So it basically went viral. And the side effect of making the Seneca army appear to be these bloodthirsty war criminals, which of course they weren't,

But that kind of psyop about indigenous nations then continued on. Yeah, you devote an early part of your book to these psyops, the ones that were at the heart of what came to be called the Indian Wars, a series of wars between white settlers and tribes lasting over three centuries. Some of the myths that drove the psyops against indigenous people still persist today.

One of them is the disappearing Indian myth. The myth is simply that as white settlers move across the United States into the West, there's this kind of social Darwinian process of tribes disappearing. This myth was a way of convincing white settlers that

it's okay to move into these Western lands that had been promised to indigenous tribes. I talked to Gene O'Brien, who studied local histories in New England and found that these little historical societies would often begin their stories about their town with a kind of last Indian myth where they would say, well, there used to be a tribe here, but then the last one died 20 years ago. Bible

the way, there is an indigenous family that lives down the street. But anyway, all of them are gone. Papering over what was really going on, which was in fact not natural at all. It was militaries clashing. It was kidnapping indigenous children and sending them to schools very far away from their families and forcing them to learn English and read the Bible and learn Western farming strategies.

Can you tell me one or two notable psyops that the U.S. engaged in abroad during the last century?

during and after World War II is Voice of America that broadcasts U.S. and foreign news in many, many languages and to show that American culture is open and that we promote all points of view. Even though the Voice of America was a relatively reliable source of certain kinds of information, it wasn't allowed to be played in the U.S.,

because the U.S. wasn't supposed to be influenced by its own propaganda programs. But there is what you call a weapons transfer program when these same PSYOPs tools are transferred to U.S. soil. Yeah, during the

Cold War that we start to see psyops that had been designed for use against foreign adversaries creeping into U.S. culture wars. And the way that it's done at

as to paint certain groups of Americans as basically foreign, whether you're a communist or you're LGBT or under Jim Crow laws, if you're black, you're assigned to a kind of second class status. Is that psyops though? Or is that, you know, a fundamentally biased legal system?

the mid-century is seeing tools that have been developed in psychological war getting transferred into culture war. If the law is defining certain Americans as inferior, that is effectively a psyop. It is demoralizing.

Part of the power of a psyop is that it contains a kind of violent threat. That's where we get something like the groomer myth. The groomer is someone who is a pedophile.

And so this is a way of claiming that an entire group of Americans deserves to be imprisoned. That's a violent threat. After researching this book, one of the things that really worried me the most was that I was seeing so many violent threats in political rhetoric because that's a sure sign that the rhetoric is borrowing from the psychological war playbook.

Because as soon as you characterize your adversary as someone who deserves imprisonment, you're not having a debate. You're having a war. I want to circle back for a moment to the definition of PSYOP. Because everything that you're saying makes sense.

But a PSYOP is a conscious strategy directed by an entity into the minds of people. So when you talked about people threatening each other on X or something like that, how is that a PSYOP strategy?

Where is the governing authority there? When you hear a debate break out on X, they're using violent threats, misdirection, scapegoating. They're borrowing strategies from military engagements. What makes a PSYOP a PSYOP is its content. But if something is an operation, then it's deliberate, right? It's hard to imagine that

Joe Schmo yelling about pizza-eating Democratic pedophiles, all those people yelling at school board meetings in Indiana are knowing that they're carrying out a PSYOP.

I actually took a very abbreviated course in psychological warfare from a guy who's been teaching it in the Army for many years. And he told me that one of the things that people in the Army worry about is the fact that you can unleash a psychological weapon. And unlike a bullet, it doesn't land somewhere and then stop. A PSYOP is different from a gun.

A really good PSYOP involves its audience enhancing it, embroidering it. When we talk about a culture war, these kinds of operations that start with the military, and when I say start, I mean start back in the 1940s and 50s,

These kinds of operations have turned into something else. They've become stories that ordinary citizens use to browbeat each other, to intimidate each other. What that means is that our public sphere feels less like a conversation or even an argument and more like a war. Do culture wars ever end? It seems like ours are centuries old.

It does. And I think it can be very dispiriting. But that idea, too, the idea that culture wars never end, is a weaponized story. It's an apocalyptic tale of the United States going down in flames, being told a lot right now by Trump and other politicians in his camp, designed to make us feel paralyzed, like there's nothing we can do about it.

But it's not true. We know that throughout history, and people have figured out ways to befriend their neighbors again, to form new coalitions, new communities, new governments. And so I look with a lot of hope toward people who are doing things like building independent archives of information, creating new kinds of social networks online, new kinds of stories about people whose voices are rarely heard,

That's the way out of culture war, to tell better stories and listen. Thank you so much, Annalie. Thank you, Brooke. Annalie Newitz is author of the new book, Stories Are Weapons, Psychological Warfare and the American Mind. ♪

That's it for this week's show. On the Media is produced by Eloise Blondio, Molly Rosen, Rebecca Clark-Calender, and Candice Wong, with help from Pamela Appiah. On the Media is a production of WNYC Studios. I'm Brooke Gladstone. And I'm Michael Olinger.