The Pro-Truth Promise initiative, which aims to share, honor, and encourage the truth, seeks to stop misinformation. More than 11,000 people from various countries have already signed it, including more than 1,000 politicians.
It also proposes actions to recover civility in politics, explained Dr. Gleb Tsipursky, an expert in behavioral sciences and co-founder of the initiative, according to the Oct. 6 Daily Caller.
“We can use behavioral science, cognitive neuroscience, and behavioral economics to take specific steps to address these problems,” Tsipursky told the Daily Caller. “And that’s what the pro-truth movement is all about,” he added.
Among the actions that adherents are committed to following is verifying information before sharing it, trying to stop misinformation.
The members also accept when others share facts even if they don’t agree with their opinions, and acknowledging those who remove false information.
In the United States, several members of Congress have joined the Pro-Truth Pledge, reported the Daily Caller.
A list of those who have accepted the initiative appears on its website. It also offers options for sharing it through social sites.
Among the actions that the organization allows is to follow up on the information shared by anyone linked to the initiative. In the case where the information shared appears to be false, it is investigated and the person is contacted privately to clear up any misunderstanding.wIf the information shared proves to be false then the person is asked to retract it. Should he or she refuse then the the person’s name and misinformation is sent to media outlets stating the information is incorrect.
The impact of the Pro-Truth Pledge is definitive when two politicians face each other in a very close election, with very few votes separating them, making the candidates’ support for the truth have a significant weight in the results.
“And that’s why we need politicians who are more truth oriented in winning those elections that are important. And that will be really important because they will be held accountable,” Tsipursky said.
The tendency to manipulate information has increased lately, not only among politicians, but also in the media and on social networking platforms, where censorship is left to administrators who determine what can and cannot be published.
Their power has apparently been exceeded, to the extent that President Donald Trump chose to request the repeal of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which indicates that social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter have taken on the role of publishers.
Section 230 currently grants social media companies an exemption from U.S. libel and defamation laws because of their role as hosts for information sent by others, but their form of censorship requires them to account for their manipulations, said The Postmillennials.