In Chapters Three and Four of the book, UnSpun: Finding Facts in a World of [Disinformation], by Brooks Jackson and Kathleen Hall Jamieson, the authors continue to expose the tricks of the trade as well as the psychological aspects that are used within politics and advertising to deceive the public. Chapter Three covers a variety of word usage strategies that are used. Chapter Four focuses primarily on the psychological manipulations that occur in advertising and politics. This chapter offers a miniature psychological study, that is rich with examples of how our minds play tricks on us and how we can even deceive ourselves due to our erroneous held beliefs.
In Chapter Three, a framework is provided to alert people to more of the deceptive ploys, or “tricks” as Jackson and Jamieson, label them, advertisers and politicians use. These include:

 Trick #1 “Misnomers,” the intentional labeling of a product that truly does not represent what a person knows to be the truth. Tall coffees and large olives are two examples used by the authors to make this point. Any frequent buyer at Starbucks knows that a “tall” is really their small. If you buy “large” olives, you are really getting a medium to small size, compared to all the sizes of olives that are available.

When it comes to misnomers, it is wise to question, what is behind the name. Does it really describe the product the company is promoting? What is a better name for it?

 Trick #2 “Frame It and Claim It,” this practice comes packaged by the use of deceptive words, and misleading terminology. The objective is to try to make people think either favorably or unfavorably about a product, ideal, issue or politician.

This can be brought out in word choice, some examples are the choice between pro-life or pro-choice, the difference between fetus, and baby, these terms are put out there and to choose one or the other based on the terminology, puts people in a position of taking sides based on the word choice.

Jackson and Jamieson warn us not to make judgments based on how something is framed by words. They advise us to look beyond what people want us to think to find out the rest of the story.

 Trick #3 “Weasel Words,” these are strategies used to lure people based on something they are supposed to get, even though it may be in relation to a single item. Many stores use this in advertising a certain percentage off, this practice will get people into the store for a sale, based upon a supposed deal they are going to get, even though that deal may exist for one item only.

Using words such as largely, most, several, are key words to be on the lookout for as they are non-specific in their use and can have whatever application the author wants them to have. The effect of this is that people can be persuaded to enter contests, but along with the entry, feel compelled to purchase something from the organizers, as was the case of the Publishers Clearing House. Many people received letters giving people the idea they had won something, when in fact they were contestants only.

 Trick #4 “Eye Candy,” words can be powerful by themselves, but more compelling is the use eye candy. As a person views a video, they can get sucked into the pictures they see on the screen, all the while being given warnings against something that they don’t even acknowledge, because the brain is focused on the pictures.

Drug companies can sell all kinds of prescription drugs, and gloss over all the horrible side effects by a pretty picture and nice music accompanying the warnings. The public is shown one thing, while being told another.

The FDA has denounced the use of pictures and ordered the ads for Paxil CR off the air as false and misleading due to the fact that the ads failed to clearly communicate the risks associated with Paxil Cr.

Visuals can be used to reinforce false messages that can’t be spoken, as well as gloss over bad facts. Jackson and Jamieson advise that when dramatic images appear on screen, we need to listen carefully to what the verbal message is along with it. We need to question, what are my ears telling me about the picture? Does the picture agree with what I am hearing?

 Trick #5 “The ‘Average ‘Bear,” when we hear the word average, we conclude that it means somewhere in the middle of something. Technically it is somewhere in the middle of something, however if the extremes on each end of the spectrum are worlds apart, what becomes presented as “average” can be a gross distortion of what a person perceives “average” to mean when it is presented as a reinforcement of a theory or idea.

Bush calls attention to the point that there has been an increase in the average income since he took office. His fact sheet gives evidence that after tax income has risen 7.9% since he took office. The facts are accurate and many Americans financial status improved, but the average is misleading because most of the gains were at the top, and many Americans financial status has declined.

Jackson and Jamieson advise that when we hear the term average, we need to question whether that “average” means typical, or a difference between huge extremes.

 Trick #6 “The Baseline Bluff,” politicians use the term cut a lot in their slogans for support. The term cut is not always clearly defined. In 1996, Clinton accused Dole of trying to “cut” Medicare by $270 billion. The truth, Dole and the Republicans never proposed to reduce the amount of money spent on Medicare, merely to hold down the rate of increase. Clinton’s use of cut, could only be classified as such in relation to projected future spending. This is what budget experts like to call the “baseline.” Clinton himself proposed a “cut” of $124 billion in Medicare, without calling it that. When you hear the word “cut” it is wise to ask, a cut compared to what?

 Trick #7 “The Literally True Falsehood,” this is the use of words that are deceptive, without being technically false. The term “reduced fat” may literally be a true claim, but what was the reduction from? “Reduced fat” does not always equate to a substantial reduction in fat or calories. It only has to be a little less in order to qualify as reduced.

Jackson and Jamieson tell us to ask ourselves, what are the parameters I am being enveloped in with the statements being made? Are they really saying what I think they’re saying? What are they leaving out?

 Trick #8 “The Implied Falsehood” a lot of times advertisers try to imply what they can’t legally say. One marketer sold an Ab Force belt, which caused electrically stimulated, muscle, twitches around the belly. The ads implied that people could lose weight, tone and firm their stomach muscles, and acquire that coveted six pack, without exercising. While this was not stated specifically in the ad, it was implied through the pictures of well muscled, lean men and women shown in the advertisement. It is also indicated through the name Ab Force.

The message came across to people, even though it was never stated outrightly. “It illustrates how false and unsubstantiated claims can be communicated indirectly but with utter clarity,” the FTC’s decision stated.

The implication here is when you hear something being strongly implied, but not stated outright, ask yourself, why does it have to fall between the lines? Why not just say it? According to Jackson and Jamieson, most often the reason they don’t is that they want you to believe it is true.

Throughout Chapter Four Jackson and Jamieson delve into the minds of unreasonable, irrational, illogical people. Humans aren’t wired to think rationally. That has been confirmed by brain scans. People make irrational choices that lead them into following cults, even when the predictions of a cult leader prove false. Many people still cling to the cult leader, by rationalizing their failure. To admit failure, would mean admitting they were wrong. According to Jackson and Jamieson, in the face of outright failure, some people become even more committed to the cause that they see fail before them.

Psychologist Leon Festinger explains the reason for this. It is psychologically painful to be confronted with information that contradicts what we believe. While it is common to feel discomfort when confronted with evidence of error, in a person’s deeply held beliefs, if people fail to acknowledge the error, it is termed “cognitive dissonance.”

 The Keech followers were a group of people who quit their jobs, sold their homes, and waited for deliverance from a flood that was to come and destroy North America. On particular day, they went to Keech’s living room and waited. The flood didn’t come. In the morning, evidence showed they were wrong, however, Keech offered up another message, in support of her new position. They had been spared because of their belief. Keech created a new scenario that rationalized her new found position. Many in the group became more committed to their cause, rather than admit the error.

 This is labeled as the moonbat effect. “You believe with all your heart soul and mind that a story is correct. You base your belief, not on evidence, logic or reason, but simply because you want to believe so badly, the thought of it being wrong invalidates your very existence and that makes your heard hurt” “A barking moonbat is someone who sacrifices sanity for the sake of consistency.”(69)

There is actually a psychology of deception It is true that human beings are not fact driven and rational. We get facts wrong more often than we think we do. We do so in predictable ways. Often we accept information that supports our beliefs and we reject evidence that challenges them. The way our mind operates, defies logic.

Evidence suggests that humans tend to seek out weak evidence to support existing beliefs, while ignoring evidence that disproves those beliefs. We apply strict criticism to non-supporting evidence, but willingly soak up evidence we feel provides support to our ideas, regardless of how weak the evidence is.

We tend to over generalize, from vivid, dramatic single examples. When we see images of and hear accounts of a plane crash, we become fearful of flying and think it is dangerous. Numerous flights take off and land daily without mishap, but what sticks in our minds is the fear factor that is associated with the images of the single incident that is played out before our eyes so dramatically on the screen.

Psychologists have found that when we most strongly think we are right about something, we are usually wrong. We get manipulated by another’s strongly expressed dogmatic opinions, even if they are wrong. We let language do our thinking for us. Jackson and Jamieson provide us these tips to avoid traps of the psychological pitfalls that lead us to ignore facts, or believe bad information.

 “The Pictures in our Heads Trap,” the idea that misinformation that reinforces what we already believe, is easy to accept.

Democrats exploited this psychological trap when Kerry falsely accused Bush of favoring big “cuts” in Social Security benefits. It was connecting a Democratic favored idea to a Republican opposed idea, to create an untrue picture of Bush’s real position on the matter. A good rule is that “in general” doesn’t necessarily mean specific. Again, look at the facts, what is the evidence?

 “The ‘Root for My Side’ Trap” This comes from the idea that our commitment to a cause colors our thinking and affects our viewpoint of what we do see or don’t see. According to psychologists Hastorf and Cantril, after observing and questioning the crowds about their perspectives on the behavior at a football game between Princeton and Dartmouth, each side was partial to their own team. Each saw their opponent as more aggressive than themselves.

 Hastorf and Cantril concluded that people don’t just have different attitudes about things, they actually see different things. Each person sees the “thing” from their own perspective. Hence, when content agrees with our views, it seems true, but material that counters our biases stands out in our minds and makes us look for a reason to reject it. It is called confirmation bias. Jackson and Jamieson advise the best way to avoid this is to ask yourself, what fact could prove them untrue? Is there evidence I am failing to consider?

 This leads right into the “I Know I’m Right” Trap. Unfortunately, the more misinformed we are, the more strongly we insist that we’re correct. Many times, people who hold the least accurate beliefs; are the ones expressing the highest confidence in those beliefs.

 The “Close Call” Trap, when two choices are very close together we tend to exaggerate the differences. Human beings crave consistency and accuracy, we want to be certain of our choices, so when we are forced to make decisions between two closely related things, we exaggerate the difference to justify our choice. If we did not do so, we could get stuck in uncertainty and indecision.

Consumers get locked on autopilot at times, mindlessly ambling through soap and toothpaste purchases. While small things don’t matter so much, we should be conscious when it comes to investing in big ticket items. Active open mindedness is the key to being able to look at new facts that you may not have looked at before. Be willing to look for what you are missing. Don’t stay on autopilot and move unconsciously through life. Jackson and Jamieson’s advice is: watch out for irrelevant or nonexistent reasons, and make important decisions attentively. With all decisions big and small, be aware of our own psychology. Look for facts, be willing to accept and change if your biases are challenged and proven wrong. Avoid being deceived by making sure the pictures in our heads come as close to reflecting the world outside as they reasonably can.