{"id":268912,"date":"2020-11-13T11:31:31","date_gmt":"2020-11-13T16:31:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/issues\/after-trump-a-struggle-for-shared-truth\/"},"modified":"2025-10-07T23:17:37","modified_gmt":"2025-10-08T03:17:37","slug":"after-trump-a-struggle-for-shared-truth","status":"publish","type":"issues","link":"https:\/\/policyoptions.irpp.org\/fr\/2020\/11\/after-trump-a-struggle-for-shared-truth\/","title":{"rendered":"After Trump, a struggle for shared truth"},"content":{"rendered":"

Almost four years ago, Donald Trump\u2019s presidency began with a small, silly lie<\/a> about the size of his inauguration crowd. On Nov. 7, as Joe Biden\u2019s lead in the vote count became insurmountable, the Trump presidency effectively ended with a big, dangerous lie \u2014 as the president claimed that he had won but been cheated by fraud.<\/p>\n

Both lies flew in the face of all evidence. In 2016, however, we were only just starting to grasp the way political narratives and social media filter bubbles converged, allowing people to believe what a Trump adviser coined \u201calternative facts.\u201d In 2020, we are unsurprised when such lies emerge, and we know more about how conspiracy theories are spread<\/a>, deceiving millions into believing them.<\/p>\n

One thing has not changed: we are vulnerable. As the transgressive satirist Sacha Baron Cohen<\/a> shrewdly observed, \u201cdemocracy depends on shared truths; autocracy depends on shared lies.\u201d Our lack of shared truth presents a huge threat to humanity \u2014 imperilling social cohesion, confidence in democracy, compliance with public health guidelines, racial equality, respect for the rule of law, and our ability to act collectively against climate change.<\/p>\n

The week after the 2016 election, I wrote that Trump\u2019s victory merited study by ethical communicators<\/a>, because \u201conly by understanding how communication can be used for division can we aspire to see communication used more often for hope, healing and harmony.\u201d<\/p>\n

Is Biden\u2019s decisive victory a repudiation not just of Trump, but of Trump\u2019s divisive and dangerous approach to leadership communication? No, but there are glimmers of hope. What fresh lessons can we learn today about the role of communication in achieving mutual understanding?<\/p>\n

A defeat for hubris, not a victory for truth<\/strong><\/p>\n

Trump proved to be fallible. His surprise 2016 victory created an illusion of the president as a political and communications mastermind \u2013 skilled in gaslighting, media intimidation and misdirection.<\/p>\n

While still a potent politician, the Trump of 2020 proved unable to adapt his message or follow a disciplined strategy to target swing voters. The narrative of grievance was ineffective from an incumbent. The call to action \u2013 \u201cKeep America Great\u201d \u2013 flew in the face of observable reality. He blew his best chance to reset the campaign with an erratic performance in the first presidential debate<\/a>. And while Trump\u2019s inner circle had better instincts<\/a>, they harmed their chances by indulging his whims and obsessions \u2013 such as attacking mail-in voting, holding ego-boosting rallies during a pandemic, and wasting scarce advertising dollars on Washington cable shows the president likes to watch.<\/p>\n

Would Biden still have won had Trump not shown such hubris? Since so few minds changed in the summer and fall, perhaps. Biden’s core messages were certainly sharper (\u201cBattle for the soul of the nation\u201d and \u201cBuild back better\u201d). However, the Trump campaign\u2019s success in convincing many Latino voters that Biden was a Castroor Chavez-style socialist<\/a> (an ironic claim, given Trump\u2019s similarities to the latter) was a grim reminder of the weakness of current defences against dishonesty.<\/p>\n

The campaign did, however, reveal more about the best defences against these dark arts.<\/p>\n

Investing in smarter media \u2014 both news and social<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the 2016 campaign, the mainstream media were too often co-opted into complicity with Trump\u2019s narrative. His allegations of bias made them bend over backwards to devote comparable coverage to Hillary Clinton\u2019s use of a private email server and Trump\u2019s much more serious misbehaviours \u2014 including misuse of charitable funds, the promotion of racist \u201cbirther\u201d conspiracy theories against former president Barack Obama, and multiple allegations of sexual assault.<\/p>\n

By 2020, news media outlets and social platforms alike had reconsidered their responsibilities and developed policies and practices to prevent obvious falsehoods from standing unchallenged. In the recent U.S. campaign, many professional journalists refused to be manipulated:<\/p>\n