Ignoring citizen unrest and being overthrown
Starting reforms that then get out of control
Picking a secretly pro-democracy person as a leader
You can see how gaslighters are prone to making these errors. They only consider their own opinion, and don’t consider the input of citizens and even their own advisers. Gaslighters always think they know best.
One can hope that eventually all dictators will fail due to their fragile egos. Tragically, many times too many people are hurt and killed before that happens.
GASLIGHTING MEDIA
One way politicians control the narrative, of course, is through clever use of the media. And when control of the media—newspapers, radio stations, television—is consolidated into the hands of a few, you’ve got a perfect vehicle for gaslighting. Not to mention censorship of unpopular opinions. This is why it is so important that media outlets not be allowed to become a monopoly. If only one or two groups own the media, there is a great danger that it will become state-run. Some dictators have taken over a media company by force, whereas others have formed their own media companies. There is also the influence of government on media—while the government may not officially own a media entity, they strongly influence it. In Russia, laws have been enacted that make it easier for the government to censor journalists and block access to websites; in addition, journalists have been threatened and attacked (Slavtcheva-Petkova 2017).
When the government starts telling the media what to write or show to the public, journalists self-censor for survival, or the government blocks Internet access, we’re all in serious trouble. Venezuela’s president Nicolás Maduro forces the media to broadcast his speeches (Hayes 2017). Many dictators and authoritarian rulers have done the same. And pity the media owner who tries to defy a despot. His operations will be shut down and he’ll be imprisoned.
The idea of unbiased reporting, of leaving your viewpoint out except in an opinion piece, which existed when I received my telecommunications degree in the early 1990s, has now become more permeable. And with the advent of social media and more news outlets competing for viewer time, the line between news and entertainment has become more blurred. When a “reality” television star became president of the United States, things really tipped into surrealism.
When the president of the United States orders the media to leave the room while meeting with a world leader, refuses to take questions from particular news outlets, endorses one news outlet and calls the others “fake news” while making over two thousand false or misleading statements all within the first year of his presidency, you know the problem is serious (Kessler 2018; Washington Post 2018).
Always Check for Cred
Not only is it vital that we protect our media outlets from being gobbled up or censored, we must all use our good sense and rely only on reputable news outlets. A reputable news outlet holds to principles of journalistic integrity. Its reporting relies on a credible source or sources, and if a journalist is offering a personal opinion, it is clearly stated as such. My undergraduate degree is in telecommunications production. Believe me when I say that true journalists and other media are held to high standards of accountability because of their great power to influence others.
Reputable news outlets must also report when they have made an error. For example, recently, National Public Radio (NPR) revealed that its senior vice president for news, Michael Oreskes, had resigned after sexual harassment allegations. NPR reported that there were questions as to when management had become aware of Oreskes’s alleged behavior and his alleged past history of harassment at the New York Times, and as to whether NPR had acted with due diligence (Kennedy 2017). Here the news organization itself was reporting on its own shortcomings. By contrast, a Fox News website search for Roger Ailes mentions nothing about Ailes’s alleged history of sexual harassment or the suit against him filed by Gretchen Carlson, a former Fox News anchor.
That’s how gaslighting works in the media: black out the stories you don’t like and maybe they’ll disappear or be forgotten altogether.
Be a Responsible Poster
Before you post or retweet a news story on social media, check to see whether it is true. Here are some tips:
Check the source of the story, including its URL.
Crosscheck the story with reputable news organizations. If it’s verifiable, they will have a story on it.
Look at the source’s “About” section on its website. Is it factual or is sensationalist language used? If there is no “About” section, this is a red flag on its legitimacy.
Always and never tend not to appear in legitimate news stories.
If a story quotes a source, look up that source. Is the person or organization cited a legitimate authority, with training in that field?
If a source quotes a study, look up the study; www.scholar.google.com is a good place to verify published scientific studies.
If a story has no attributed author, it is suspect.
Is the story fact or speculation?
A story that has a question for the title is usually answered with “no.”
GASLIGHTING IN SOCIAL MEDIA
Social media has become a ubiquitous part of our lives. It’s so alluring to be able to make contact with people in seconds—but it is also a rabbit hole that we can all too easily fall into and get lost in.
Again, the key is to be a responsible consumer. What you read on social media may not just be false—it may also have sinister and manipulative purposes. Think about the extraordinary revelations of Russian hacking and other efforts to influence the US presidential election in 2016. As you may have read, social media companies don’t vet (verify) their advertisers, and there are thousands of bot accounts at social media sites. These bots have the aim of manipulating public opinion, affecting election outcomes, and destabilizing society. As Abraham Lincoln said, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” In 2016, the Russian government knew this, and it used social media to create polarization among US citizens.
Social Media Advertising
It is estimated that 126 million Facebook users in the US saw posts, stories, and other content, including advertising created by Russian government agents over the course of the 2016 presidential election (Byers 2017). Facebook initially reported that the content had only reached 10 million US users. It gave information to Congress on three thousand ads linked to Russia. So, not only were the posters engaging in gaslighting activity, but the social media corporations played their part as well. Even if they were unwitting accomplices, I believe they should share the burden of responsibility.
Facebook pages and Twitter accounts with the names “Defend the 2nd,” “Secured Borders,” “LGBT United,” and “Blacktivist” were found to be fake accounts with Russian ties. One Russian-based Facebook page posted cute dog photos—with the possible intent of leaking political content over time (Isaac and Shane 2017).
One example of such ad manipulation was when a Russian Facebook account with 250,000 followers promoted an anti-Muslim protest at a Houston mosque in May 2016, while another Russian account with 320,000 followers encouraged Muslims to attend a counterprotest at the same location and time (Cloud 2017).
Social Media Bots
Between September 1 and November 5, 2016, there were 1.4 million election-related tweets sent by Russian bot accounts (Wakabayashi and Shayne 2017). Bot accounts are fully automated and controlled by code. While some bot accounts are relatively harmless, Russian bot accounts were specifically designed to create arguments among users, with an intent to lead to degradation of US society.
Twitter estimates 2,700 accounts had ties to the Russian-sponsored Internet Research Agency (Romm and Wagner 2017). Reporters and editors from over twenty thousand news outlets around the world retweeted or replied to these fake Russian-sponsored tweets from January 1, 2016 to September 30, 2017 (Popken 2017).
Google found $4,700 worth of ads with questionable ties to Russia. Eighteen YouTube
channels were affiliated with the Russian government’s disinformation campaign (Romm and Wagner 2017).
Facebook has acknowledged that “most” of its personal accounts have had their personal data scraped by “malicious actors” (Madrigal April 2018).
How do you know when a bot has communicated with you?
The handle is followed by a list of numbers, i.e., @joe345654434.
A reverse image search finds that the profile photo was lifted off another account.
There are no posts on the account.
The account sends out tweets at all hours.
The account just retweets content with certain keywords.
The account consists of just replies to content with certain keywords.
The account has primarily “click-bait” content.
The profile photo or banner is overly patriotic.
The account doesn’t ramp up tweets right before an election as legitimate accounts do (bots start tweeting misinformation much earlier).
Their posts are full of inflammatory statements or rhetoric.
If you see accounts that appear to be bots, report them to the owner of the media. (They will investigate, especially when many people flag the same accounts.) Also keep in mind that many people in power have fake followers on social media—sometimes numbering into the hundreds of thousands or more—so don’t take follower numbers at face value.
Protecting Yourself from Social Media Manipulation
Social media companies claim that they have only limited power in who has access to their sites, and that it is almost impossible to track and ban all the offending accounts. These companies want users to shoulder the burden of verifying accuracy and validity. It’s too complicated and costs too much to do it themselves. Or so they say.
Report accounts and advertising that looks like propaganda. If you are thinking about joining a group on Facebook, do your research and see who organized the group, and if there are actual people behind it.
With the consumption of information having moved largely online, we are at greater risk than ever of being gaslighted. We are also living in a time where we are inundated with information—and we don’t review if the source of the information is accurate and unbiased. It’s important that you do some double-checking before you retweet or post any article that has a bias to it. Your best protection from bots is to keep an alert and skeptical attitude, rely only on news sources that follow journalistic standards of excellence, and do your homework.
Resist participating in online surveys or signing petitions, unless you have confirmed that the organization behind it has a legitimate purpose you support; often these exist only to cull as much personal information as possible from participants, and as we know from the Facebook scandal, this can have far-reaching consequences.
A GASLIGHTER OF A DIFFERENT KIND
There’s one social milieu that seems as if it were designed by, for, and about gaslighters—cults and other extremist groups, such as ISIS, white supremacists, and Holocaust deniers. All of these group leaders are gaslighters, and cults (the religious type sometimes referred to as “new religious movements” in the press) and extremist groups satisfy every conceivable checkbox for gaslighting behavior. Cults and extremist groups are almost always run by charismatic, media-savvy, and controlling leaders who manipulate their followers into blind obsession. Cults and extremist groups also tend to go against societal norms. They prey on people who are in desperate straits or particularly vulnerable to needing direction and structure and then lead them down the dangerous path to giving over their mind (and what few possessions they might have) to the leader or organization.
LET’S TURN TO the next chapter to explore cults and extremist groups, and what you can do to spot, avoid, fight, or get away from them.
7
BEWARE THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN
False Messiahs, Extremist Groups, Closed Communities, Cults, and Gaslighting
WHILE YOU MAY THINK THAT CULTS ARE RARE AND THAT THIS CHAPTER isn’t relevant to you, I encourage you to read it. Any person or organization can exhibit cultlike behavior and can strive to take advantage of you and gaslight you; you may find information here that speaks to your life and experiences even if you think cults are the stuff of news and made-for-TV movies. Additionally, we are hearing more and more about the rise of extremist groups, whose values are based in religion or a particular belief system (such as white nationalism).
Look carefully at closed communities, extremist groups, and cults and you see all the usual gaslighting traits: seductive charm and the promise of taking charge, slowly ratcheted mind control until one’s sense of personal agency is destroyed, isolation from loved ones, flying monkeys, and punishment of those who try to extricate themselves, among others. Cults and extremist groups exist in every country, and in every cultural group. No one is immune.
Cults have torn apart families, caused permanent psychological damage, and have gotten members and outsiders killed. They break down a person’s psyche and replace it with the prescribed beliefs of the leadership. Cults have long-lasting effects on people’s emotional and even physical health—even years after leaving the cult.
That’s why I am devoting a chapter of the book to how to spot a cult or extremist group, resist its pull, and get away if you’ve found yourself mixed up with one (or help a loved one break free). Just like in cases of domestic violence, as you read about in Chapter 5, victims of cults or extremist groups can be trapped in a cycle of abuse and dependence from which it is very difficult to break free.
Some cults and extremist groups are not so much about a belief system or religion—they are about gaining control of people and fleecing them of their money and dignity. Sounds a lot like other forms of gaslighting, doesn’t it? In a cult or extremist group, one leader or set of leaders must be followed or else—and the consequences can range from monetary fines to physical punishments or even death. Other extremist groups, such as white nationalists, focus on a particular ideology—and use the hallmarks of gaslighting (lying, distorting, etc., and many of the techniques discussed in the previous chapter) to recruit members.
TYPES OF CULTS AND EXTREMIST GROUPS
There are different types of cults and extremist groups, including political, religious, and destructive. Political cults are oriented around political action and ideology; for example, “far-left” or “far-right” beliefs. Some sectarian political organizations would fall into this category. Religious cults, as the name implies, are organizations that claim to have a spiritual or religious purpose. Some breakaway churches would qualify as cults, as would such groups as Heaven’s Gate or the Branch Davidians, both of which you may have read about elsewhere. Destructive cults are less well known. They acquired this label because their goal is to deliberately injure or kill members of other cults. Criminal gangs and terrorist groups would be examples of such cults. (Here I am using the label “terrorist” for any group that uses force or violence against a person or persons to intimidate as part of furthering its agenda.)
This chapter will focus mostly on religious and destructive cults, which are particularly dangerous due to the wide amount of psychological and physical damage they have, can, and will do to members, their families, and society.
Cults vs. Healthy Belief Systems
People will often ask me how you can tell the difference between a cult and a healthy but offbeat or nonnormative belief system. Let us count the ways.
“I belong to a normal church now, I can come and go as I please. That was really wild to find out, that I could just not show up one week, and that was cool with them.”
—Sadie, 40
Cults, extremist groups, and closed communities may include the following unhealthy behaviors:
You are “locked in.”
You no longer have free will.
You are not supposed to ask questions or to question leaders’ authority.
You are told that the group is superior to other groups and peo
ple.
They’ll tell you they can raise your children better than you can.
They’ll sabotage and undermine family relationships, particularly between parent and child.
Your children are taken from you to be raised by the group’s members, and you are told it is in your children’s best interest.
Your children must attend a specific school.
Older members are married to the cult’s children.
Your spouse is chosen for you, from within the group.
Money usually flows to the leaders to buy lavish items, while followers live in relative poverty.
There is no clear accounting of funds.
You are pressured to give them large or regular sums of money.
You are told you need to leave your money to the group upon your death.
You are told to give up all your possessions, and may be encouraged to give them all to the group.
They operate businesses with other names, and hide their true affiliation.
They may have splintered off from a legitimate religion due to their extreme beliefs.
Science is seen as wrong.
They have a series of strict rules or “laws.”
There is a strict dress code or mandatory uniform.
Specific ways of eating, sleeping, and interacting are deemed to be for or against the group’s norms.
Specific jargon is used that does not exist outside the group and its members.
Isolating behaviors are used to keep you in the cult and not divulge information to “outsiders.”
Demeaning names are given to people who are not members of the group.
Gaslighting Page 12