Stupid media stunts, Part Three: Confirmation bias as proof. Sorry, iPolitics, you ought to know better.

iPolitics is a typical Canadian media outlet: full of pseudo-progressive hubris that is short on facts and heavy on the sophistry. default-thumb

This article is instructive why it is an intellectual lightweight.

Rumour mill hurting everyone, including the #MeToo movement

Okay, let's examine why the confirmation bias makes this opinion piece completely useless.

The article makes an assumption that #MeToo is run by gossip and rumour because so much of it is the published reports of anonymous sourcing...

Except those people are not anonymous. Their identities are known, just not to everyone.

But aside from the threats some who have come forward have experienced workplace terrorism, there is something many in the media are overlooking.

Something that looks like this:


The nondisclosure agreement.

You get harmed at work, but you cannot say it out loud. (While an article in CJR insists they are probably not binding in court, you can be sued in civil court for violating it -- and even if win, the legal costs can be prohibitive; hence ensuring silence one or or another.)

Some civil suits also contain the Shut Up Clause.

So even though we are hearing a lot, we are not hearing a fraction of the systemic abuse happening because of this kind of contract.

It very easy for the pro-abuse lobby to pretend they are worried about backlashes and due process when they very well know the public is getting a highly sanitized view of the entertainment and media industries.

It is a feint that hinges on the confirmation bias: that is, ignoring any evidence that refutes the theory.

If tomorrow, by some miracle, all nondisclosure agreements were said to be null and void -- we'd be hearing a lot more voices freely discussing the workplace terrorism they experienced.

So let us not pretend the pro-abuse lobby has a point.

They don't.

They just think they are cunning.

But the truth proves otherwise.