It has not been a good couple of weeks for misinformation. There has been the revelation that Russia has directly paid for the creation of a media company and paid exorbitant amounts to press pro-Russian/anti-Ukrainian propaganda. Then there was the Tucker Carlson interview where he promoted a Holocaust denying/pro-German “historian”. Finally, there has been the promotion of a conspiracy by Vice President J.D. Vance and repeated by Donald Trump in the Presidential debate that legal Hattian immigrants are “eating the dogs” of their neighbors. This would be bad enough in how ridiculous a notion it is, but not only is it totally unverified, many Christians including World Magazine have jumped on this lie.
What this has revealed is what we’ve seen previously, that there are people who for various reasons want to believe propaganda is true. Even when it is refuted, even when proved false, people want to believe certain narratives. How do we deal with those who do so? Can we separate the obvious bad actors from others? And how can we do that believing the best not worst of them? This is what I’ve been struggling with. I think we’ve come to a place where we need to distinguish between 4 different persons who are perpetuating misinformation.
1. The Intentionally Malicious
There is a point were calling certain actors “racist” isn’t a slur, it’s just fact. When persons repeat racist talking points, post knowing dog-whistles, or follow or promote things from people who themselves claim to be “kinists” or Nazis it’s time to mark, call out, and avoid. Guys like Joel Webbon, Eric Conn, Brian Suave, William Wolfe, Stephen Wolfe, Doug Wilson, and much of the CREC are simply a mix of toxic misogyny, racism, and Christian Nationalism. These are characters that are best ignored as giving them oxygen (even rage posts) give them the attention they crave. These persons do not deserve the time dedicated to them even in decrying them. If I never read a bloviated screed from Doug Wilson, I will die a very happy man.
As I’ve said before pointing out that these persons are toxic and not worth spending any time on isn’t unloving. It’s following scripture to call out and then “have nothing to do with them”. It’s loving to say to these guys that no they aren’t our “Christian brothers”, because we do not have fellowship with the works of darkness. And if you are someone who has unapologetic Nazis following and liking you, you aren’t walking in the light. The same goes for those who unapologetically lie, or who gleefully spread false information. (And if you think former President Trump and his running mate fit these criteria you would be correct.)
2. Those Whose Muscle Memory Defaults to Trusting Right-Wing Media
The first person I have little sympathy for and struggle to see them operating in any sort of good faith. The best way someone can interpret the actions of those I listed above is either extreme ignorance, or willful self-delusion (and that is the best you can take them at). But what about others? I do think there are those who deserve a little bit more grace and a different entreaty when they get caught up in misinformation.
The first person I have some sympathy for is someone for whom the “muscles” that they have trained in Conservative spaces “activate” when stories proliferate in social media. These are people who look at sources like Tucker Carlson, Fox News, and Newsmax as still being reliable. Perhaps this person (for some reason still) is inclined to believe former President Trump. It may be that they grew up in environments where immigrants were always demonized, where “illegals” were immediately seen as “stealing jobs”, etc. This person needs to be confronted with actual facts, and then with why they WANT the false story to be true. As I said before about the Olympic controversies, there is a better question that cuts through the “reports” and ever more obscure “evidence” and that is, “Why do you WANT this story to be true?” In many cases the person who is simply “reacting” simply needs to be reminded that they don’t really have a strong need for a certain story to be right or true, they’re just reflexively “not liberal”.
The entreaty to this person is why are you giving credence to these sources? Tucker Carlson was fired from Fox News of all places, for being too misogynistic, racist, and lying on air. They chose to fire him and PAY HIM to not be on broadcast television because he is such a liability. He just had an apologist for HITLER on his show. A genuine question is, why are you giving this person, of all people your time? The same thing goes for those who have just been found out to have been paid by Russia to spread propaganda. The loving thing to say to someone who is deciding to still give these people credence is to ask that person to simply listen to something else for a period of time. Ask people to not give their time to these sources at all, for at least a month. I honestly believe if you can take the firehose away from some friends, when they then try to go back, they’ll pick up on how grating, nasty, dare I say it boring these “entertainers” are.
3. Still Wanting to Be “In”
This second impulse is very closely related to the first and that is the desire of those who are not fully “outside” the MAGA Conservative world to still be “in”. We must be sympathetic to those who either because of their peer group, or their demographic, or merely the social circle they’ve always belonged to, find themselves still wanting to be “in” the group. Even if they’ve soured on a candidate, or changed their minds on some issues, or come to convictions about some things, there is still the “pull” of many Conservative groups. There can be an impulse that, “We still agree on this thing, so I’m still welcomed”.
I honestly think there are several things’ people in that situation need to understand that they might not be able to see right now. The first is how much “conservatism” has moved into crazy/scary territory now. You have persons promoting Nazi propaganda, Trump has allowed a 9-11 “truther” into his inner circle, people are repeating absolute falsehoods, and it is UGLY. (Check out the responses to these two posts one by Russell Moore and another by Doug Wilson) There are no more “moderating” voices in many cases.
This brings me to my second point and that is those “in” do not tolerate dissent. One may believe there are still matters within Evangelicalism that are able to be agreed upon while holding others in amicable disagreement. However, fundamentalism increasingly shortens that list and is quick to “cancel” when there is dissent. The person who seems cordial and an ally over one thing (say anti-trans issues) will absolutely disown or disparage over another. While this tendency happens in both “Left” and “Right” fundamentalism, I think it’s more devastating on the “Right”. Why that is, is my final point: what someone has the possibility of losing on the Right can be much more devastating on the Right than the Left. Many of those on the fringe promoting the most radical things are doing so because they know they will be supported if they are ultimately “cancelled”. They have enough followers, have relationships with donors or private equity persons, or have multiple revenue streams where they will survive.
The entreaty to those who want to still be on the “in” is, your “in group” is radicalizing in ways that are incredible. Secondly, THEIR radicalization isn’t going to hurt them, but eventually it will hurt you. They do not brook compromise. They will not give you a job when YOU step over a line. If you think you can speak out about this thing you are for, and they are against, and will still be tolerated you are fooling yourself. The thing about wanting to keep your toe in one world is you are rejecting the community you could have. I’ve seen this with a few mutuals on X is wanting to be “in” with certain persons means you’re dismissing those you could be partnering with. What I fear for some is they are trying to still be in partnership with an ecosystem that has already moved on from them and they aren’t going to have any ground to land on when those persons ultimately drop them.
4. “Your Mask is Slipping”
There is a fourth person I think is in this eco-system of repeating propaganda and untruth and that is the person for whom their “mask” if you will, is beginning to come off. I believe for a very long time in American Evangelicalism people could be misogynistic or racist within their culture and they really didn’t have to address it. It’s kind of like someone living in a “whites only” town who is able to confidently say they aren’t racist. The fact is, they aren’t being challenged whether they are racist or not. They don’t have to confront whatever racism they might have. One of the things I really do thank God for when it comes to the Trump era is how much it has revealed the underlying attitudes and biases of many Evangelicals.
I’ll give a recent example in Dr. Al Mohler. Recently Mohler took to his radio show to try to address the falsehood of J.D. Vance and Trump’s claims about Springfield, Ohio. In doing so he tried to suggest the accusation of “people eating dogs” dated back to a 1993 Supreme Court case involving the practice of Santeria (Voodoo) and the ritualistic sacrifice (and eating) of animals. The problem is that anyone with two working brain cells knows the trope of minority persons eating pets has almost nothing to do with an obscure Supreme Court case 30 years ago. It is a well-known trope that has been used against many ethnic minorities (especially Asian) for centuries (there’s even a story of a restaurant that was forced to close for a time last year). Mohler intentionally tried to give some cover for an obviously racist and false claim by couching it as a valid concern against someone else’s religious practices. There is simply no excuse for someone who is the President of an academic institution, with literally millions of dollars of resources available to him (including staff and interns), to “spin” the story the way that he did. This isn’t the only recent problem with Mohler. He spoke recently at NatCon 2024 which not only had Indian politician Ram Madhav speaking (who almost certainly has persecuted Christians), Mohler had a panel discussion with Doug Wilson. If that may have seemed to give Wilson too much legitimacy it must be stated that Mohler has repeatedly shared the stage with Wilson at Wilson’s school conferences.
I believe Mohler is a great example of someone who’s “mask” is slipping. He’s had no problem justifying his promotion of a slavery apologist and seeing his students (especially a former intern William Wolfe) play in far-right spaces that are supremacist adjacent. This is outside of Mohler going from “Never. Ever. Period” with Donald Trump, to trying to find any way he can still endorse him. It isn’t about the “sanctity of life”. It isn’t about “Christian Values”. It isn’t even anymore about “standing up for truth”. It’s now about identity and power. And quite frankly some form of white supremacy is wrapped up in that identity and power.
Calling out those Behind their Masks
Those whose “masks” are slipping first need to not be excused. Their associations, their comments, what they excuse, quite simply needs to be called out. This is even more important when there are multiple instances and several problematic issues. The appropriate response to being called out for misinformation, lying, veiled racism, and misogyny is sorrow and repentance not deflection and faux outrage. Finding out someone you have associations with or have promoted has a serious blind spot that they will not confront is something that should make us scrutinize our relationships. Personally, I have unfollowed, and decided to never work with people online with whom I have had some rapport, even friendship because of their willingness to perpetuate misinformation. For me personally it isn’t a matter of what they are against, or what they are passionate for, being willing to essentially lie for something shows something about their priorities.
If this person is in a position of authority or trust, if they are speaking on behalf of other Christians, I believe there is a demand that they be disowned and denounced publicly. This is even more important if they are claiming some sort of “Biblical” or “Gospel” authority. It should be clear that this person doesn’t speak for Christians. Pastors, leaders, Elders who are not only willing but gleeful in repeating lies or racist rhetoric need to be marked and avoided. Especially if they are unrepentant.
Sadly, for many of us, watching people we perhaps trusted or saw as authorities engage in misinformation, slander, and lies (particularly for political purposes) should cause us to look at our shared beliefs and ideologies. If what someone believes is so fragile they have to resort to invented stories or veiled deflection then we must ask if we share that belief whether that belief is worth sharing. If our ideologies and theologies produce rotten fruit in so called “leaders” and supposedly “mature” Christians, we must at the very least question them.
We have seen and continue to see that much of what has shaped Evangelical culture has not been “Biblical” or Godly. The fruit has been very visible in what people do, not what “truth” they claim to hold. The time is here when those committed to “truth” and believe in a God who hates lies hold the malicious and the liars accountable. And that includes those who want to pretend they aren’t either. Sometimes that includes ourselves.
(Thanks for reading! I’m always grateful for those who lend me their time. If you want to get my latest please subscribe and consider supporting me in making this content. If you’d like to gift a one-time gift of coffee or dinner, that would also be appreciated https://venmo.com/u/Jason-Mallow-1 Lord willing I’ll see you again next week)
What is your source that World Magazine helped spread the misinformation about Haitian immigrants? I did a quick search and couldn’t find anything.