"Alternative Facts" is unword of year 2017, which has just been decided by a jury from Darmstadt. The election feel a bit late, because speech of "post factual" was already 2015. Donald Trump began an election campaign in which he feelings rumors as facts. That wouldn't have been bad, would have remained in entertainment industry. After his inauguration almost exactly one year ago, his spokeswoman Kellyanne Conway missed his Artdes speeches with a epistemological basis: if team TrumpDinge claims that all media prove false, it dannhandelt Not about lies or falsehoods. No, she said, Trump andhis people have access to "alternative facts".

The reporter, to whom she told you, had to laugh for a minute. "Alternative facts", that seems to be a AlternativeBezeichnung for "definitive falsehoods". You are affect answer to what you call an uncomfortable truth since Al Gore: if something does not fit, n it is just spoken appropriately. The remedy against this post-or more precisely: Alterfaktizismus of Trump seemed to have long been practised. It has been known for many years to American and since a few also from our talk shows: fact-checking. Everything a politician expresses is checked for its validity. It is only to apply that Waswirklich is true.

The only problem is that you can do little with this circumvention factual review against someone like Trump. Simply list all lies, false allegations, and falsehoods he has given as Kandidatoder president, as if he were damitschon by himself – that is what New York Times, The Washington Post and Buzzfeedgetan have done. Sometime in course of year 2017, ir lists are n asleep. Not because Trump stopped spreading falsehoods. But because DasPrinzip wears off.

A bit of blurring is always re

There is a serious suspicion that passable could have been culture of merciless fact-check that DemPostfaktizisten Trump prepared way. It sounds paradoxical for first time, Abervielleicht was also involved in Hyperfaktizismus, when FaktenbewährteSachlichkeit was expelled from politics. For if re is a populistischeErkenntnis from culture of fact-checking, n it is that all politicians – albeit not all of m to same extent – sometimes do not remain completely at facts. Comparison you only look at a sufficiently fine resolution, you can find factual errors in DenAussagen of all politicians.

This is not even intent because y want to lie or tactically deal with truth (Auchdas comes naturally). But it is due to function menschlicherKommunikation: a bit of blurring is always re. If you only genuggräbt deeply, you will find contradictions, inaccuracies, omissions in speech of all politicians. Populists have understood this and are playing it mercilessly in territory of established parties. Accusing his opponents of being fake news is likely to be twist that Trump 2017 has sent most frequently on Twitter.

This, of course, does not mean, dasszwischen obsessive false speaker Trump and a party spokesman, Dergeschickt with truth, has no difference whatsoever. DiesenUnterschied to Blur, that's exactly where populist gesture lies. But can't neverless conclude that mere hyperfaktische accuracy to Gestaltungvon policy has contributed little constructively. The recognition of truth istzunächst a political process, but one of knowledge. Dieeigentliche political work only begins after that. She's not thing DerFact-checker. A culture that is mainly due to unmasking of Falschenkonzentriert does not, refore, bring out something right.

Date Of Update: 17 January 2018, 12:03