What exactly is a conspiracy theory? Cambridge Dictionary defines it thus: A belief that an event or situation is the result of a secret plan made by powerful people.
Wikipedia’s page titled Conspiracy theory, currently pronounces that ‘the term generally has a negative connotation, implying that the appeal of a conspiracy theory is based in prejudice, emotional conviction, or insufficient evidence’.
It also boldly states that ‘such belief is correlated with lower analytical thinking, lower intelligence, psychological projection, paranoia, and Machiavellianism’. Gosh! Quite a diatribe against folk who sometimes happen to have a different opinion and view to the mainstream narrative…
The genesis of the term ‘conspiracy theory’ is sometimes attributed to 20th Century philosopher Karl Popper, but has also been ascribed to the CIA, shortly after JFK’s assassination, allegedly to discredit those who were asking searching questions after the tragic event.
Why do some people believe in conspiracy theories and others don’t? Sometimes it can be as simple as a feeling of unease that what we have officially been told just doesn’t quite seem to fit. So then we might try to do some research on the subject, to see what other explanations we can find, interpret and process in a way that makes more sense to us. This can be referred to as ‘confirmation bias’ which is usually deemed to be a negative thing. The main types of confirmation bias are said to be:
Biased search for information
Biased interpretation of information
Biased memory recall of information
The word ‘biased’ means to be unfairly prejudiced for or against something or someone.
Is it, therefore, equitable to use the term confirmation bias when referring to so-called conspiracy theorists? For example, early in 2020, when lockdowns were forced upon us by governments around the world, swiftly followed by instructions to cover our faces, some of us began to suspect that something deceitful was possibly being perpetrated, but had no proof. This led to hunting for further sources of information because the mainstream media was announcing things which seemed at odds with what we were witnessing with our own eyes and ears.
On 19th March 2020, four days before the first lockdown in the UK, the government lowered the threat level of the virus, stating it was no longer considered to be an HCID (High Consequence Infectious Disease). For the then PM Boris Johnson to order us to stay at home appeared to be nonsensical. It wasn’t an HCID, yet we were being told that it was so dangerous that we had to hide at home.
How, then, could Point 1 be deemed to be a ‘biased search for other information’, if some of us felt that we could not rely on our usual news outlets? Why on earth should we refrain from doing our own research?
As for Point 2: ‘biased interpretation of information’, some well-credentialed professionals have been speaking out against lockdowns, masks and jabs all along, often with evidence to prove their points. Are they supposed to be dismissed out of hand?
And for Point 3: ‘biased memory recall of information’, well let’s see…
I’m pretty sure that on 10th November 2020, Sky News reported that the then Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, announced “the vaccine will not be used for children. It HAS NOT BEEN TESTED ON CHILDREN (emphasis mine)…this is an adult vaccine for the adult population” - but hey, maybe I just had a ‘biased memory recall of information’. Oh wait, I’ve just checked and it is online at hansard.parliament.uk which is the official record of proceedings and debates in Parliament.
The Covid jabs were then rolled out to children the following year. But the conspiracy theorists predicted that…
So, if anybody ever refers to you as a conspiracy theorist, be glad that you don’t necessarily believe things simply because you are told to. Feel fortunate that you bothered to do your own research. Wear your tin foil hat with pride!