Commentary - When We Can't Call a Lie, a Lie

Throughout the past decade, we have seen a dramatic transformation throughout the world in the language we use to describe problematic ideas, information and creations. This transformation has progressively moved us away from language where we can explore issues toward dangerous language that is vague, imprecise, avoidant and diminishes critical thought and freedoms.

These words/phrases include, but are certainly not limited to:

• "misinformation"
• "disinformation"
• "alternative facts"
• "hallucination"
• "algorithm"
• "deepfake"
• ...various emojis...

These words, their employment and effect are in many respects identical to the "Newspeak" presented in George Orwell's fictional work, 1984 which explored and warned against real social mechanisms of thought control. In this work, a key political group imposes various mechanisms to control the way people think by controlling their identities and the way they can express themselves, including a new language, "Newspeak". In the fiction, words like "bad" are suppressed in favour of words like "ungood" and with iteration of this language losing more and more words to suppress thought.

Similarly to this fictional work, the popular use of these words are a part of a new, dangerous progression of language for our real world.

The world we live in is increasingly under populist rule. A key component to populism is to posit that "the people" are a homogeneous group with a singular identity and ideology, as such language is being manipulated to suppress the range of thought toward agreement with a single status quo. Traditional vocabulary enables us to explore the world around us, express abstract ideas, and most importantly express dissent and advocate for action. This new direction however limits critical thought by removing such words and replacing them with a diminished, milquetoast vocabulary that limits thought.

With this new direction, dissent is not tolerated. Difference in identity is not tolerated. Difference in experience is not tolerated. We are expected to fall into line and put on an act of unity and stability. When we see problems with the ways others act, we are expected to be silent, or contribute positively to ideas for which there is no improvement, or only to use milquetoast "Newspeak" words that don't really say anything.

I would like to explore some words that are being lost in our modern vocabulary and the effects of their loss.

(of information:) "wrong", "lie", "propaganda", "libel" and "slander"

When we are free to use words like "wrong", "lie", "propaganda", "libel" or "slander", we can fully explore the transgressions at hand, advocate for the truth to be uncovered to replace the lie, identify those who may have been victimized into redistributing the lie and detox them, and for liars and propagandists to be brought to justice for the harms they cause.

When false information is called "misinformation", "disinformation" or "alternative facts", we do not fully express and understand its true nature to take appropriate action. As we have seen around COVID, falsehoods have run rampant with no real means to address them, and the truth has been forced to compete with spicier, more captivating conspiracy theories.

(of technology:) "defective", "flawed" and "fraud"

When we can be honest and describe technologies with serious problems accurately, including calling them "defective" or "flawed", or when they are misrepresented as being more capable than they are as "fraud", we are able to get to the heart of the matter and take action. We can require technology creators to improve their technology before we accept it, and to protect society from developers who knowingly promote software as being capable of doing jobs it can't do competently.

When describing the flawed results of software as "hallucinations", the conversation fails to understand where the flaws come from. We now have computers generating false information and no way to get the software fixed because software getting things wrong has become normalized

(of business:) "schemes", "designs" and "manipulations"

If we can describe the machinations within businesses accurately using words that describe those machinations as being the work of people, we are able to find that these processes and methods are created by people who should be accountable for the outcomes. This includes the way businesses manipulate people to engage with their websites, poison their minds with advertising and the like.

When we describe business processes and methods that interact with us as "the algorithm", we set up walls where we don't explore the business itself. Many people just accept what online services present them without really understanding that it's all about a business manipulating them for engagement.

(of visual/audio productions:) "fraud", "abuse" and "assault"

People have their identity and likenesses misused more than ever by developers and users of generative AI technology. When we can call this "fraud" when their likeness is used to trick others without their consent, "sexual abuse"/"sexual assault" when people are virtually stripped of clothing without consent, or "assault with a weapon" when technology is misused to assault and take peoples' personal security and agency, we are able to fully explore the social impacts, especially upon the victim.

When we describe these productions as "deepfakes", they become just yet another post online where we don't think about the costs to the victims.

(of anything:) any statement that critically evaluates a situation

When people can use words to describe their feelings and experiences in situations, we as a society can grow. Society can acquire new experiences, new information that can be useful for progress. Society can challenge assumptions to grow to new understandings to be able to do more.

When we just use emojis, nothing happens.

The common theme in all of the "Newspeak" is that it controls the discussion and keeps it superficial to limit the way we can think about the issues.

Already, we are seeing similar impacts around this new language to the impacts associated with propaganda. People heavily using this Newspeak are having their minds altered to become unable to think about important issues and to present solutions. Attention spans are diminishing likewise to only accept brief soundbites that they can react to in likewise a short soundbite, sometimes even just an emoji. This is not unlike in the work 1984 where people watching propaganda react with gestures, lacking ways to articulate themselves. As this continues through a generation, society's children will outright have no capacity to think in abstract ways to build a better world.

We therefore should resist the use of this Newspeak, and instead stick with words that allow us to fully explore the nature of what we encounter to preserve critical thought. It's critical for the future of the world.