The following is a quote from a report published by the NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence, titled:
Inoculation Theory and Misinformation
In this report, we explore the role that psychology and behavioural science can play in the mitigation of online misinformation. To do so, we first discuss how to define “misinformation”, and how it relates to various other commonly used terms such as “disinformation” and “fake news”. Next, we examine the psychology of correcting misinformation: what happens when someone is exposed to a fact-check, and what are the benefits and drawbacks of correcting misinformation once the damage is already done? Finally, we discuss how to build psychological resilience against misinformation through psychological “vaccines” or “inoculation.”
- Dr. John Roozenbeek and Professor Sander van der Linden of the University of Cambridge, Department of Psychology, Cambridge Social Decision-Making Lab, October 2021
By Emmie Cromwell - The mix of emotions I’m currently experiencing are a bit overwhelming; a diverse intermingling of disbelief, panic, uncertainty, and resignation. How can one feel otherwise when discovering something as twisted as ‘Inoculation Theory?’
A few days ago, I came across a reference to this theory; something that, despite having no previous knowledge, had my spidey sense sounding its alarm, like the sirens that warn of a brewing tornado. I immediately grabbed my phone to gather more information. As a result, I found the publication from which I quoted above.
One of the lessons I’ve learned in the last year, since starting my Substack, is that if I try to share every detail, I’d still be writing my first article. Therefore, I cannot analyze this enlightening, albeit disturbing report to the extent it deserves. Because of this, I hope you chose to, at least, skim the actual paper for further insight.
The authors, Roozenbeek and van der Linden describe the birth of ‘Inoculation Theory’ as follows:
“During the Vietnam War, the U.S. government became concerned about the prospect of its troops becoming brainwashed (or persuaded) by foreign propaganda. This concern prompted the social psychologist William McGuire to explore the idea of a “vaccine for brainwash.””
The NATO report describes ‘Inoculation Theory’ as “a psychological “vaccine” against misinformation.” This definition was enough to give me the heebie jeebies.
Based on the authors’ more detailed explanation, my best summation of this theory is that the subtle exposure to potential misinformation could protect people from falling prey to future exploitation. The authors refer to this subtle divulgence of misinformation combined with a declaration of deceit as ‘prebunking.’
An example provided by the authors of a ‘psychological “vaccine” against misinformation’ is as follows:
“Nearly all climate scientists – 97% – have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening. Some politically- motivated groups use misleading tactics to try to convince the public that there is a lot of disagreement among scientists. However, scientific research has found that among climate scientists “there is virtually no disagreement that humans are causing climate change””
The information they deem false is revealed (in bold print), prebunked, and sandwiched between two affirmations of the truth, as determined by Dr. Roozenbeek, Professor van der Linden and all of their fellow intellectual truth-seekers.
Despite favorable results for this type of psychological “vaccine,” the authors are clearly dissatisfied with the limitations of this particular treatment. There is simply too much misinformation out there, and getting ahead of every vulnerable subject would be quite a challenge.
This is when Roozenbeek and van der Linden bring up the subject of games and videos that could desensitize people to misinformation in general. They refer to the following as ‘inoculation’ games:
Bad News; Breaking Harmony Square; Go Viral; Cranky Uncle
After announcing that such games do help protect people from misinformation manipulations, they claim that ‘inoculation’ videos are an even better option. Roozenbeek and van der Lindin write about a study involving short videos that provide information about manipulation techniques. They seem to favor this technique due to its all encompassing nature. I describe it as an umbrella “vaccine” against misinformation. They go as far as saying that the videos would be easy to use as advertisements on social media.
While I won’t get into the ‘Future Direction’ details of the report, I did find some particularly alarming phrases within this section that I believe, highlight the disturbing nature of ‘Inoculation Theory.’ The authors discussion of “psychological herd immunity against misinformation” and “psychological antibodies” bring light to the blind narcissism that infects many within our world’s intellectual community.
Whether one’s intentions are good or not, it should be obvious to most that psychological “vaccination” is a dangerous concept. Considering the biased and often incorrect labeling of ‘misinformation,’ onto whatever deviates from the Globalist narrative, the authors may want to include ‘inoculation theory’ in their ‘inoculation’ videos as a manipulation technique of which to beware.
After all of this, I thought it would be helpful to show everyone an example of what Roozenbeek and van der Linden deem to be dangerous misinformation.
They describe a Chicago Tribune article from April 2021, titled:
“A ‘healthy’ doctor died two weeks after getting a COVID-19 vaccine; CDC is investigating why”
Roozenbeek and van der Linden, in all seriousness, fret about how the headline is factual, but deviously so. They express concern about the Tribune’s implication. Despite the fact that they cannot confirm or deny how this doctor died, Roozenbeek and van der Linden present themselves as god-like in their certainty that this death was unrelated to the vaccine. Not only do they hold these personal delusions of grandeur but I suspect they consider themselves heroic for protecting the less educated population from misguidance by concocting a plan to impose psychological warfare upon the world’s population.