When a friend posts an urban legend on Facebook...

[MamaMootz]

When I posted the Snopes link, I said something to the effect of "while this is a really lovely story, I thought you should know it's an urban legend" with the link.

So I don't think I posted the link in an offensive way - but I will, in the future, take notifications of this sort to a PM instead of posting it on the wall.

[SquishyMooMoo]

Ugh, that's always hard.

My feeling is that if it's something potentially dangerous if ANYONE who read it followed it, it's OK to post as a reply on their wall. However, if it's something where you kindly want to correct the person, but no harm could come from people reading it, you can use a private message.

Re: Dangerous postings, I'm referring to things like... One time I saw a friend's mother had posted telling everyone to "update their Facebook settings and protect their information!", but it was linked to an application. I posted in response something like, "Uh oh... You should probably change your password. Facebook settings would NEVER be changed via an application, so this is probably a scam meant to steal your account information." I wanted HER to know it was dangerous, but I didn't want anyone else to follow it, either!

[Ken]

Ugh.  This is a tough one.

Time for dueling quotes!

"A skunk is more pleasant company than someone who prides himself on being 'frank.'" -- Heinlein

vs.

"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,—that is all   
    Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know" -- Keats


Bad Ken is inclined to PWN!!! by responding publicly.  Good Ken stops Bad Ken from doing that unless (1) it is a friend with whom I have a good-natured-ribbing relationship, or (2) the legend being promoted is actively dangerous to readers ("Go to this website and give your social security number for free candy!").

I almost always correct -- unless it is someone with whom I have a troubled relationship -- but I almost always do it privately.  Most people I correct privately then correct themselves publicly.

[Suze]

the ones I have the most trouble with are the "missing children posts" 

they are like the "pink bunny with the drum" they just keep going and going and never stop.

some of these hoax children have been 10 years old for decades ((Penny Brown)) for one

[Allyson]

I'd say something. I think urban legends are one of those things that may never die, but the more people who are aware of the falsity of these things, the fewer people will pass them on. Even the harmless ones--it feels (to me anyway) like allowing misinformation to stand paves the way for all sorts of false information to keep being passed around with an atmosphere where nobody questions it.  And some of these are definitely not harmless.

Also, I would want to know if it were me passing it on! I wonder why people are so attached to believing these things that they'll get upset when they're corrected? If something is a lovely story, then can't it just be a lovely STORY? Plenty of fiction has made me cry and touched me emotionally, without pretending to be true.

[T'Mar of Vulcan]

Even the harmless ones--it feels (to me anyway) like allowing misinformation to stand paves the way for all sorts of false information to keep being passed around with an atmosphere where nobody questions it.  And some of these are definitely not harmless.

Even the so-called "harmless" ones should NOT be passed around, simply due to the fact that they are FALSE. We are already seeing examples of made-up stories from previous centuries being told in ours as the gospel truth - and people believe them because they are in books, even including some reference books. It then takes some dedicated researcher to go into the background and say, "This is false". And even then, other people refuse to believe the evidence and say, "That's just an opinion" because they are so attached to these false beliefs.

As an example, what about the "did Shakespeare really write his plays?" question. Until something like TWO CENTURIES LATER, no one even questioned it. It was only when some woman who was a fan of Francis Bacon (or someone; I forget) decided that HER favourite writer wrote them, that people started passing around this false belief. (Bill Bryson researched this in his book on Shakespeare - if you require a reference, that's it.) So people have spent years and written papers based on some nonsense some non-writer made up centuries ago. Tell me that isn't hurting somebody.

Same with the "moon landings were a hoax" people. That idea only gained credence in the '90s (though I believe there were people before that who did not get publicity) and now more and more people are believing it. Who does it hurt? I dunno, how about the brave men who risked their lives in outer space? Do you think they enjoy knowing people think they're not heroes at all but liars?

If a story is false, I will say so. Whether it seems trivial or not, whether "it's not hurting anybody" or not. Some of us still believe that the truth is important.

[Thel]

Urban legends are also a pet peeve of mine. Whenever I am forwarded one, I always make a point of finding the relevant reference(s) debunking it and send it to the person who sent it to me, although if it was something potentially harmful (such as a virus or grossly incorrect medical advice) I would not hesitate to forward the reference to all. I am always polite about it, because I do not want people to feel embarrassed as there is never malicious intent on the part of the sender (not the original sender, obviously!).

What surprises me the most is that even fairly intelligent people fall for them without any questioning. The last one I received was from an acquaintance I consider to be well-educated, and it was suspicious from the start. It said that when you order petrol at the station, you should order in litres instead of in euros (say, order 10 litres instead of 12 euros, or the equivalent), since petrol pumps have some kind of device that can short you up to a quarter of the amount if you order in euros. This part of the hoax included a fair amount of technicalese. Well, it took me all of ten minutes in Google to find several sources indicating that there was no way this could happen, and that there is no difference whatsoever between ordering in litres or euros. I could even find a possible origin for the hoax, from a year-old post (!) at a Mexican site -and even there, it stated it was a hoax. I sent all the information to my acquaintance and his answer was that he had received it from someone he trusted so he had thought it was all right. And I believe herein lies the problem. I am sure the person who sent it to my acquaintance had also received it from a reliable source, so s/he did not bother checking it, and so on. Although checking it did not take long, it is indeed easier and faster to do a "forward to all" than a Google search, but this indicates people in general seem to prefer trusting outside sources unquestioningly than making the small effort to contrast information, and this worries me.

But I'm glad to see that we are all on the same page here! I also think that the more "gentle debunking" we do, the more people will start to see the need to find out for themselves, and hopefully, our inboxes will just be left with "cutesy" PowerPoint forwards. Which, to me, are a lesser evil but an evil no less!   

[Suze]

Ban DHMO

ever read the site?  http://www.dhmo.org/

makes you think -- about just what people will believe if you present it "right"

[pierrotlunaire0]

As an example, what about the "did Shakespeare really write his plays?" question. Until something like TWO CENTURIES LATER, no one even questioned it. It was only when some woman who was a fan of Francis Bacon (or someone; I forget) decided that HER favourite writer wrote them, that people started passing around this false belief. (Bill Bryson researched this in his book on Shakespeare - if you require a reference, that's it.) So people have spent years and written papers based on some nonsense some non-writer made up centuries ago. Tell me that isn't hurting somebody.

Her name was Delia Bacon, and I totally agree with you.

Consider George Washington and the cherry tree.  Well, it's a nice story and it teaches a lesson about honesty.  But, it is also complete fiction, and even as a child you know it isn't true.  Don't give me pablum and nonsense about a cherry tree.  Teach about his choosing to put his comfortable life on the line because he believed that what he was doing was the right thing.

You start with something as innocuous as that, but it is still a lie, and it leads down the wrong path.

[Hushabye]

When I posted the Snopes link, I said something to the effect of "while this is a really lovely story, I thought you should know it's an urban legend" with the link.

So I don't think I posted the link in an offensive way - but I will, in the future, take notifications of this sort to a PM instead of posting it on the wall.

I suspect that this one got such a strong negative reaction for precisely the reason you posted: because it was a lovely story.  Well, they're obviously also not etiquette-ready, but their reaction may have been stronger because it wasn't one of the stories that can cause a lot of harm.  I think your decision to take it to PM in the future will be best, for whoever you're notifying and for you.

[hobish]

Ban DHMO

ever read the site?  http://www.dhmo.org/

makes you think -- about just what people will believe if you present it "right"

You know people drown in that stuff, right?

[kingsrings]

This is exactly why I asked my friends to stop sending me all email forwards. Too much questionable accuracy or downright inaccuracy, and when I politely corrected them, I was told the same thing others have said on here: it doesn’t matter because the message is a good one, and I shouldn’t rain on the parade. Either that or “snopes isn’t always right”. So far on Facebook I haven’t had this issue fortunately, other than someone posting something on their wall, they haven’t sent it on to their friends.

[artk2002]

As an example, what about the "did Shakespeare really write his plays?" question. Until something like TWO CENTURIES LATER, no one even questioned it. It was only when some woman who was a fan of Francis Bacon (or someone; I forget) decided that HER favourite writer wrote them, that people started passing around this false belief. (Bill Bryson researched this in his book on Shakespeare - if you require a reference, that's it.) So people have spent years and written papers based on some nonsense some non-writer made up centuries ago. Tell me that isn't hurting somebody.

Same with the "moon landings were a hoax" people. That idea only gained credence in the '90s (though I believe there were people before that who did not get publicity) and now more and more people are believing it. Who does it hurt? I dunno, how about the brave men who risked their lives in outer space? Do you think they enjoy knowing people think they're not heroes at all but liars?

OT, but these get us into the study of denialism, which is a fascinating subject.  Some people seem drawn to being denialists (there's even a term, "crank magnetism,") so you may find that someone who is a Shakespeare denialist is also a moon landing denialist.  There's something magical in having special knowledge that is shared with only a few, and that magic is more powerful than the idea that the "knowldege" is actually false.  Some deep seated desire to be "special" and somehow superior to others.

Back more on topic, that desire to have special knowledge is what drives gossip.  It's what makes the family matriarch own all of the news in the family.  And, it's what makes some people forward garbage, and get very, very upset when you point out that it's wrong.  After all, you're taking away their specialness.

[Twik]

But there's also the problem that what is reputed to be a fiction may actually be true after all.

For example, in the early days of the Spanish Conquest, Bishop Landa wrote down notes of the Mayan writing system, including an "alphabet". This was used in the 19th century in various vain attempts to crack the "code". By the mid-20th century, it had become perceived truth that Bishop Landa had been entirely out to lunch, and that what he wrote had no connection to how to read Mayan glyphs. The Mayans, it was declared, did not use an alphabet, their writing was entirely symbolic, with no phonetic components at all. L. Sprague de Camp wrote a scathing parody of Landa getting his information from a peasant who had no idea what he was asking.

Until the code *was* cracked, by a Russian researcher. Who based his work on Landa's notes, and proved that the writing was, indeed, largely phonetic.

[artk2002]

But there's also the problem that what is reputed to be a fiction may actually be true after all.

For example, in the early days of the Spanish Conquest, Bishop Landa wrote down notes of the Mayan writing system, including an "alphabet". This was used in the 19th century in various vain attempts to crack the "code". By the mid-20th century, it had become perceived truth that Bishop Landa had been entirely out to lunch, and that what he wrote had no connection to how to read Mayan glyphs. The Mayans, it was declared, did not use an alphabet, their writing was entirely symbolic, with no phonetic components at all. L. Sprague de Camp wrote a scathing parody of Landa getting his information from a peasant who had no idea what he was asking.

Until the code *was* cracked, by a Russian researcher. Who based his work on Landa's notes, and proved that the writing was, indeed, largely phonetic.

But applying that to internet forwards is like every crackpot out there pulling the Galileo Gambit.  99.9999999999% of the stuff that gets forwarded is false.  Kinda tough on that 0.0000000001% that's true, but that's the nature of the beast.

To be a Galileo (or a Landa), it's not enough to be persecuted, you also have to be right.