“What are the challenges of gender-transformative journalism in a post-truth world and what is its capacity to help build a more peaceful, just and inclusive society?
These were some of the main questions focused on a feminism and gender transformation panel, hosted by Gender@International in Bonn, Germany.
I had to ask another question first. My mind reeled at the words “post-truth-world” and it wasn’t the first time. What is a “post-truth world”? I don’t like that term, and I don’t know why. It reminds of the word “woke” which I am not particularly fond of as well because it has been so overused. Except that now “post-truth world” has become more popular than “woke”. Besides what it literally means, (we’re past the truth), what does it mean the dynamic ways it is used? And it my opinion, it is used way too often. I explored and found the following definitions:
- Beyond or superseding the importance of truth; pertaining to an era or situation when truth is no longer significant or relevant; usually in a pejorative sense, uncaring of factual accuracy. Or: The fact that emotional persuasion (not lies) is more effective than truth. (Source: Wiktionary)
- Wikipedia, on the other hand, has only an explanation of “post-truth politics”. It again mentions the whole emotional persuasion thing but then also clarifies that this “trend” is often cited a contemporary problem because of the internet, but has long been a mechanism both in the media and politics. Think about picketing as an example. And think about how certain publications only cover certain stories to tug at the hearts and minds of certain audiences. This has been going on for decades. (Source: Wikipedia)
- The post-truth era is a phenomenon that actually has a name: Agnotology. And the definition of agnotology is the study of culturally induced ignorance or doubt. Its implications are huge. (Source: Forbes Magazine)