A recent New York Times article (by Sabrina Tavernise 12/6/2016) addresses, “the proliferation of fake and hyper-partisan news that has flooded into Americans’ laptops and living rooms.” The issue Sabrina highlights is that in the age of social media, raw opinion passes as news, creating confusion, and “… punches holes in what is true, causing a kind of fun-house effect that leaves the reader doubting everything, including real news.”  Michael Lynch, a writer and professor of philosophy at the University of Connecticut remarked, “The wider problem is fake news has the effect of people not believing real things.”

People not believing real things!   Hmm – who defines what’s real?

There is more to this issue than fake vs. real, particularly from a leadership perspective.  What is real?  For example, what was real in the minds of executives at Volkswagen when they agreed to deceive regulators by rigging 11 million vehicles to cheat on emissions tests? Was breaking the law within their perception of reality?  What was real for the Wells Fargo executives as they were seemingly unaware that they had incentivized employees in their organization to create millions of fake credit accounts, or executives at Macys, Sears, The Limited, Yahoo, and Research In Motion when they did not “see” that their companies were falling behind on consumer preferences?  Two of these companies no longer exist.  It’s hard to believe that executives of these companies were stupid, or that they made decisions and took actions intentionally to impair their company’s viability.  Do we conclude, therefore, that the information that they used for decision-making was incorrect, i.e. it did not accurately reflect the reality of their situation?

A former boss once said to me that people make mistakes because they situate their reality rather than understand the reality of their situation.  In other words, the issue is not that news is fake or real, it’s how news and information compares to peoples’ closely held beliefs.  (Separately, and beyond the scope of this article is the power people have to impose their beliefs on others.)  Therefore, what’s really operative is how people form their beliefs. To that end, and consistent with the fundamentals of Applied Leadership, there are three issues for leaders to consider:  mindset, observation and language.

Mindset

Neuroscientists believe that a person’s perception is the comparison of sensory inputs (see, hear, smell, taste, and touch) with internal mental predictions.  The brain does not work solely from the latest sensory data, but instead constructs expectations about how things will play out.  These internal predictions are built during a lifetime of exposure to environments and form fixed mind maps or mindsets through which a person interacts with the world.   A lifetime in narrow environments yields narrow mindsets and vice versa.  A person can live their entire life within these mental models and never perceive any other reality.   In other words, awareness is not needed when the world is predicted away by the brain, and nothing violates those predictions.

Observation

We create reality through what we observe.  What we perceive becomes real for us and it is the lens through which we interpret events.  Moreover, each observation is preceded by a choice of what to observe, meaning that what we call truth is a construction and we participate in its creation.  Even more disconcerting is that we are influenced by the observations of others who impart reality to nearly everything.  These observers, experts in their field or not, look for certain information, or with a certain bias, and evoke the information that they went looking for and simultaneously eliminate the opportunity to see other things.

Language

It is confusing that language can be both expansive and limiting.  It influences our perceptions and can blind us as we go through our lives.  Humans are meaning-making and we find comfort in words that connect with our mental models.  These connections reinforce perceptions of what is occurring directly in front of us.  For example, consider two words that are fairly emotive at this time:  liberal and conservative.  Literally, or in their original meaning, these words define alternate views of moderation, caution, abundance, freedom, and generosity.  Yet in the current context these same words define opposing beliefs about abortion, affirmative action, death penalty, taxes, education, stem cell research, energy, suicide, global warming, gun control, healthcare, immigration, religion, same-sex marriage, social security, and welfare – all of that trapped in two words.

Bottom line – fake vs. real reflects the influence of language that conforms to beliefs, the truths that a person has constructed through what they observed in their life, and the observers who influenced them.  It also reflects the fixed mindsets through which individuals interact with the world.  These are vulnerabilities of being human.

Leaders don’t “situate their reality.”  They understand their vulnerabilities and are open to, and actively seek, challenge by others.  They accept that just because they believe in something does not make it a truth or certainty.  Instead, they fashion their interactions with others as opportunities for learning.  They build a broad network of relationships in diverse environments to add challenge to their strongly held beliefs. They continually ask questions that ultimately open doors to opportunities and inspiration.