Rand President and CEO Michael Rich has been talking about what he sees as an erosion of respect for facts and evidence in political life—a phenomenon he calls “Truth Decay.” He asked RAND political scientist Jennifer Kavanagh to help analyze the issue and lay out a research agenda to better understand Truth Decay's causes and consequences. RAND's editorial team interviewed Rich and Kavanagh to learn more about their work. In this edited interview, they talk about the evolution of their thinking on Truth Decay, how they define it, and the ongoing research RAND is conducting to help counter it.

兰德公司总裁、首席执行官迈克尔·里奇一直在探讨他称之为“真相衰落”现象，即政治生活中越来越不尊重事实和证据。他邀请兰德的政治学家詹妮弗·卡瓦纳一同分析这一问题，并制定研究计划，以便更好地探究真相衰落的原因和后果。为了解相关进展，兰德的编辑团队采访了里奇和卡瓦纳。在下列访谈中，他们讨论了对真相衰落的思考过程，给出了定义，并谈到他们正在进行的对策研究。

What do you mean by Truth Decay, and when did you start thinking about the subject?

您所说的真相衰落是指什么？您是从什么时候开始思考这一问题的？

Michael Rich:My thinking on Truth Decay grew out of my work on the dangers of polarization, something I've been speaking on since 2005. More recently, I have been astounded by the erosion of truth in our politics. I'm using the term Truth Decay because I think it captures a phenomenon that goes well beyond the current outbreak of “fake news.”

迈克尔·里奇：2005年以来，我一直关注有关两极分化的危险，并由此开始思考“真相衰落”的问题。最近，政治领域中的真相磨蚀现象让我感到震惊。我用“真相衰落”这个说法，是因为这种现象远远超过当前爆发的“假新闻”现象。

Truth Decay describes a syndrome of distrust and disagreement. I see it as a process, not an end state. It has multiple causes and manifestations, some new and some that reach far back in history.

真相衰落描述的是一种不信任、无法达成共识的综合症。我认为这是一个过程，而不是最后的状态。它有多种原因和表现，有些是新近出现的，有些可以追溯到历史当中。

Jennifer Kavanagh:One of the elements we use to define Truth Decay is increased disagreement on basic sets of facts where consensus used to be more widespread, like the science showing the benefits of vaccines.

詹妮弗·卡瓦纳：真相衰落定义包含的要素之一，就是对一些基本事实的分歧越来越大。这些基本事实在过去都是有广泛共识的，比如科学研究提出的疫苗的好处。

Another part of our definition is the erosion of what used to be a clear line between fact and opinion. You can see this in news outlets where news stories and commentary often are difficult to distinguish from each other.

定义包含的另一部分，就是事实和观点之间原来很清楚的界限正在消融。这一点可以在新闻媒体上看到，现在新闻报道和评论之间的界限很难区分。

There's also a growing volume of opinions relative to facts in the information space, which can drown out the facts. Look at your Twitter feed or any social media platform—quite the imbalance of opinion versus facts.

在信息空间，与事实相关的观点或看法也越来越多，可能会淹没事实。看看你的推特或者其他社交媒体平台——观点和事实完全不平衡。

Michael's comment on trust is another aspect. In the past 20 years, the portion of Americans saying they trust newspapers and TV news “a great deal” or “quite a lot” has fallen from 35 percent to 20 percent, while trust in Congress fell from 22 percent to 9 percent. Even trust in books has declined, according to Gallup-from 41 percent in 1997 to 27 percent in 2016. How can we establish a core set of objective facts when people fundamentally don't trust key sources of information?

迈克尔说的信任是另一个问题。在过去的20年里，美国人“很相信”或“相当相信”报纸和电视新闻的人数已经从35%下降到20%，对国会的信任从22%下降到9%。甚至对书籍的信任度也在下降。根据盖洛普调查，人们对书籍的信任度从1997年的41％下降到2016年的27％。当人们根本不相信重要的信息来源时，我们怎么能确立一套核心的客观事实呢？

How widespread is this lack of trust?

信任缺乏的范围有多广？

Kavanagh:Plenty. A recent Edelman study found record mistrust worldwide, including in non-Western countries such as Malaysia. Europe is seeing the same degradation of trust in political institutions—the European Parliament as well as national parliaments—that we're seeing in the United States.

卡瓦纳：很广。爱德曼^①最近的研究发现，在世界范围内，不信任现象已经达到创纪录的水平，包括马来西亚等一些非西方国家。欧洲的政治机构，如欧洲议会以及各国议会，正和美国一样面临着信任度下降的局面。

Could it be healthy that institutions are trusted less?

对政治机构的信任度下降有可能是好事吗？

Rich:It may be a good thing to the extent that people demand transparency and accountability from institutions and insist on verifiable facts, accuracy, and objectivity. It's not healthy if people begin reflexively distrusting all the experts and institutions they used to rely upon for complex technical or scientific information. And it's dangerous if people decide that it doesn't matter if something is factual or not, as long as it advances their interests or conforms to their beliefs.

里 奇：如果人们要求政治机构具有透明度和责任感，坚持提供能够验证的事实，保证事实的准确及客观性，从这一角度说，这可能是一件好事。但是，如果人们开始本能地怀疑那些过去一直依赖的专家和机构，也就是供给他们复杂的技术信息和科学信息的来源，那就不合适了。如果人们认定某件事是否属实并不重要，只要能促进他们的利益或符合他们的信仰就行，那就太危险了。

That's why I believe that Truth Decay and the polarization that drives it are grave threats to America—to our politics, our values, and ultimately our democracy. It's rotting away our public discourse, undermining our civic literacy, and we've even seen it inspire violence.

这就是为什么我相信真相衰落和两极分化这一动因是美国——是我们的政治、价值观以及民主，所面临的严重威胁。它正侵蚀着我们的公共话语，破坏我们的公民素养，甚至会激起暴力。

What's the ultimate harm?

最终伤害的是什么？

Rich:Well, it's hard to maintain democracy if you can't govern. Truth Decay certainly seems to be making it more difficult for government to function. Congress has been having chronic trouble passing laws, confirming nominees, and approving a budget. While there are a number of potential causes including differing values and reluctance to compromise, it seems it's in part because of disagreement about basic policy facts.

里 奇：如果控制不当，我们就很难保持民主。真相衰落使政府更加难以发挥其职能作用。长期以来，国会在审议法律条文、确认提名人、批准预算方面困难重重。虽然有一些潜在的原因，比如价值观不同、都不愿妥协等等，但部分原因似乎是对基本政策事实无法达成共识。

Another harm can arise if external adversaries use disinformation to delegitimize systems of governance. Think of the surge in cross-border propaganda, such as the effort by Russia that RAND studied in Christopher Paul's “Firehose of Falsehood” report.

如果国外的对手使用虚假信息来打击我们的管理体系，那就可能产生另一个危害。想想跨境宣传的暴涨态势吧。兰德公司克里斯托弗·保罗的报告《谎言灌喷》，研究的就是俄罗斯的宣传方式。

Unfortunately, information overload might be making us more vulnerable to disinformation. Garry Kasparov, the chess master and Russian dissident, said: “The point of modern propaganda isn't only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking … to annihilate truth.”

不幸的是，信息超载可能会使我们在虚假信息面前更加脆弱。国际象棋大师、俄罗斯持不同政见者加里·卡斯帕罗夫曾说：“现代宣传的重点不只是误传消息或推动议程，而是要耗尽你的辩证思考能力……最后毁灭真相。”

A decline in trust in institutions also can be life-threatening. Attacks on science have caused people to doubt the safety of vaccination, for instance. But study after study—including by RAND—shows that vaccines do not cause autism or other major harm. Some parents still refuse to vaccinate their children, which has real consequences. We are seeing a return of viruses like measles that had been mostly eradicated in America.

对机构信任下降也会危及生命。例如，抨击科学已经让人们怀疑接种疫苗的安全性。但是各种研究，包括兰德的研究，都表明疫苗不会导致自闭症或其他重大危害。然而有些父母仍然拒绝给孩子接种疫苗，这种做法会产生实际的后果。我们看到，麻疹等过去在美国基本灭绝的病毒又出现了。

Where do you see signs of Truth Decay?

您在哪里看到真相衰落的迹象？

Rich:Russian disinformation and hacking are good places to start. There's strong evidence of it in the United States, the former Soviet Union, and in Western Europe. We don't know how far it went in terms of influencing the last U.S. election, but we know Russia is using falsehood to sow confusion and delegitimize Western democracies.

里 奇：俄罗斯的假情报和黑客行为就是例子。在美国、原苏联和西欧都能找到强大证据。我们不知道这对最近的美国大选究竟有多大影响，但我们知道俄罗斯正在利用谎言散播混乱，削弱西方民主国家。

You may have seen the New York Times magazine article in 2015 that described the activities of government-funded trolls in Russia. It describes a very sophisticated ruse in Louisiana to make residents of St. Mary Parish think there had been a disastrous chemical spill caused by ISIS.

你可能看过2015年《纽约时报杂志》上的一篇文章，文章描述了俄罗斯政府资助网民活动，也就是在路易斯安那州精心策划的一个诡计，活动目的就是使圣玛丽教区的居民相信ISIS造成了灾难性的化学品泄漏。

Another example: The Brexit campaign in Britain was marked by huge discrepancies in expert calculations vs. politician statements about UK payments to the EU (such as the claim “every week we send ￡350M to Brussels”). And we've already discussed the widespread decline in trust in institutions. This is also an example of Truth Decay.

另一个例子：英国脱欧运动，专家计算的脱欧费与政客陈述的费用差别巨大（如声称“每周我们付给布鲁塞尔3.5亿英镑”）。我们已经讨论过对政府机构的信任缺失问题。这也是真相衰落的一个例子。

When have we seen past periods that share the markers of Truth Decay?

我们历史上有过真相衰落的时期吗?

Kavanagh:Essentially, in similar periods of political and social unrest, rapid technological and economic changes and turmoil in the media landscape. One example is “yellow journalism” in the 1890s—the creation of false news for profit and political motives, similar to the “fake news” we see now. The yellow journalism phenomenon is sometimes blamed as contributing to the political crisis and eventual war between the United States and Spain in 1898.

卡瓦纳：从根本上说，在政治与社会动荡时期，技术的快速发展和经济变化时期，以及传媒界的混乱时期，都有类似现象。比如19世纪90年代的“黄色新闻”^②就是为了利润和政治动机而捏造虚假新闻，类似于现在的“假新闻”。有时，黄色新闻现象被认为是政治危机，以及导致1898年美西战争爆发的原因。

Another example was during the Vietnam War. The line that “truth is the first casualty of war” was a big deal then. Certain actors in the government were discovered to have been telling the public untruths about what was going on in the war, and the pro- and anti-war camps were both spreading disinformation to manipulate public opinion. Experience and opinion became pervasive in media coverage, just as we are seeing today.

另一个例子是越南战争时期。“真相是战争的第一受害者”，用这句话来描述当时的情况是非常贴切的。政府的某些行动者没有把战争的实情告知公众，主战和反战阵营都在传播虚假信息以操纵公众意见。正如我们今天所看到的那样，经验和观点在媒体报道中无处不在。

What is RAND doing about Truth Decay?

对于真相衰落，兰德正在做什么？

Rich:We're doing what RAND does best—we're turning to research and analysis to better define the issue, and understand its drivers and consequences. This will enable us to move on to explore effective solutions.

里 奇：我们正在做兰德最擅长的事，即转向研究分析，以便更好地定义事件，理解其驱动因素和影响。这将促使我们探索有效的解决方法。

What have you learned so far about Truth Decay?

关于真相衰落，你们已经了解到什么？

Kavanagh:Our initial work indicates several key drivers. First, there's our cognitive biases. Humans' brains are wired such that we tend to accept information that confirms our current beliefs. We reject even factual information that challenges our biases, and we are heavily influenced by emotion and experiences in our decisionmaking. So our cognitive processing habits contribute to our susceptibility to Truth Decay.

卡瓦纳：我们工作的第一步是确定几个关键的驱动因素。首先是我们的认知偏好。人类大脑的连接方式使我们趋向于接受那些证实我们当前观念的信息，而拒绝那些与我们的偏爱不符的信息，哪怕是事实。我们在决策过程中深受情感和经历的影响。因此，我们的认知加工习惯会促使真相衰落的发生。

Another factor is that the information space has changed around us: 24/7 news cycles, the financial stress and fragmentation of media companies, social media, the massive increase in the speed and volume of information circulating. Search engines and social media algorithms can also amplify misinformation or disinformation. In April, you saw Google tweak its search algorithm to move stories it had identified as “fake news” farther down in its results. RAND has recently published research on?how algorithms can be vulnerable to bias and error—yet many are proprietary and extremely difficult to evaluate.

另一个因素是，我们周围的信息空间已经改变：24/7(一天24小时，一周7天）的新闻周期，媒体公司财务压力、媒体渠道碎片化、社交媒体、信息流通速度和数量大幅增加。搜索引擎和社交媒体的算法也会放大错误信息或者虚假信息。（2017年）4月份，谷歌对其搜索程序做了微调，将被识别为“假新闻”的内容在其搜索结果中进一步减少。兰德最近已发表有关计算算法如何受到偏见和错误影响的研究，但其中许多都是专项研究，而且很难去评估。

We also may not be equipping young people with the tools to understand how they can help. We see reduced training in critical thinking and reduced emphasis on civics education that can train students to evaluate information sources and engage with government institutions.

也可能是我们没有帮助年轻人掌握必要的工具。我们发现，辩证思维方面的训练在减少，对公民教育的重视程度也在降低，这些训练和教育能够锻炼学生评估信息来源的能力，以及与政府机构接触的能力。

Finally there's polarization—both among political parties and among Americans, who are tending to segregate themselves culturally and geographically. Polarization is actually both a driver and a result of Truth Decay.

最后就是存在于政党之间、美国人民之间的两级分化问题，他们倾向于从文化和地理方面来划分。实际上，两极分化既是真相衰落的动因，也是结果。

What's new about the phenomenon?

这种现象有什么新特点？

Rich:As Jennifer said, one big difference between current and previous manifestations of Truth Decay is how social media amplifies the problem. Winston Churchill is reported to have said, ”A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth can get its pants on.” It's worse now. With social media, false or misleading information is disseminated all over the world nearly instantaneously.

里 奇：就像詹妮弗所说，现在和过去的真相衰落有一个很大的不同，那就是社交媒体的放大作用。据称，温斯顿·丘吉尔曾经说过，“真相还来不及穿上裤子，谎言就已经走遍了半个世界”。现在的情形更加严重。借助于社交媒体，虚假或误导性的信息几乎瞬间传遍世界。

But democracies have not agreed on procedures for taking false material down. Some governments require that hate speech be deleted. Others have laws on defamation and incitement. But there is no agreement on legal or regulatory remedies to information that is blatantly false. Many Western governments as well as the technology companies are still struggling to develop responses to false news reports, and foreign propaganda.

但在如何解决虚假信息的程序上，民主国家还没有达成一致。有些政府要求删除仇恨言论；其他国家针对诽谤和煽动行为制定了法律。但是对于公然错误的信息，在法律或监管措施方面没有取得共识。现在，许多西方政府和科技公司仍在努力应对虚假新闻报道和外国宣传。

Kavanagh:Another thing that's new about Truth Decay is the confluence of factors that are interacting in ways we do not fully understand yet. It is not clear that key drivers like our cognitive biases, polarization, changes in the information space, and the education system's struggle to respond to this sort of challenge have ever coincided at such intensive and extreme levels as they do now.

卡瓦纳：另一个关于真相衰落的新现象就是各种因素汇合一起，我们还没有完全理解他们相互作用的方式。像认知偏好这样的关键动因、两极分化、信息空间的改变以及教育体系应对这种挑战的种种努力，各种因素同时发生，出现了惊人的巧合。

Who is responsible for Truth Decay?

谁对真相衰落负责？

Rich:Truth Decay describes a syndrome. There is no single culprit. If you look back in history, we've seen things like Truth Decay occurring before. It's not just the problem of a particular party. This is a bipartisan problem with deep historical roots.

里 奇：真相衰落描述的是一种综合现象，没有单一的罪魁祸首。如果回顾历史，我们可以发现这样的事情以前就出现过。这不是某个政党的问题，而是一个有着深厚历史根源的两党问题。

Consider the “Truth-o-Meter” database created by Politifact. It rates the factual accuracy of various statements by elected officials—not a scientific sample, to be sure, but it looked at statements that are considered noteworthy or controversial. Of the statements evaluated as of February, it was rating nearly half of those from the four top Congressional leaders (Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader and the two Minority Leaders) as partly or completely false.

依据政治真相新闻网（Politifact）创建的“测谎仪”数据库，它对当选官员们的各种言论进行事实准确性评估——说实话，这不是科学抽样，但它关注的是那些引起人们注意或有争议的言论。2月份的陈述评估表明，国会四大领袖（众议院议长、参议院多数党领袖和两位少数党领袖）几乎一半的陈述都是部分或完全错误的。

Why is RAND looking into Truth Decay?

兰德为什么要调查真相衰落现象？

Rich:Our goal in speaking out about Truth Decay is about getting the public focused on the value of facts and evidence as the basis for good public policy. We need debates based on a common set of facts—not slugfests over competing set of facts, or debates that boil down to opinions about opinions.

里 奇：我们指出真理衰落的目的，是让公众关注到以事实和证据作为良好公共政策基础的价值。我们需要基于共同的事实进行辩论——而不是为竞争性的事实打斗，也不是针对一些根本就是基于观点的观点去进行争辩。

RAND is fiercely nonpartisan. We stand for facts and evidence. We are not aligned with either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party.

兰德完全是无党派的。我们支持事实和证据。我们既不与民主党结盟，也不与共和党结盟。

I would like to see RAND help define what it means to be a responsible citizen in a 21st century democracy. Citizens and policymakers need to adapt to a world where disinformation and misinformation are proliferating even as we debate what ought to be done about the problem. We hope that other civil society leaders who value the primacy of facts and evidence in their own decisionmaking will also become involved.

我希望兰德能帮助确定21世纪民主社会中公民的责任。公民和政策制定者需要适应这个世界，即使在我们讨论应该如何应对这一问题的时候，假信息和错误信息正在倍增。我们希望那些在决策中珍视事实和证据的其他民间团体的领导人也能参与其中。

Truth Decay is a threat to all the people and institutions that play a role in uncovering facts, communicating unwelcome truths and standing up for evidence-based solutions, as well as those that rely on or use facts to make policies and decisions. This includes RAND. But more importantly, it's a threat to the people whose lives those policies and decisions affect.

凡是致力于揭露事实、传递不受欢迎的真相、支持基于证据的解决办法的人和机构，都会受到真相衰落的威胁，受威胁的还有那些依靠或使用事实来制定政策、做出决定的人和机构，包括兰德。但更重要的是，它威胁到那些受政策和决定影响的人们。

So how do you feel about our prospects—are you hopeful Truth Decay can be stemmed?

那么，你认为我们的前景如何——有希望阻止真相衰落吗？

Rich:Well, I would go back to my definition of Truth Decay—that it is a process, not an end state. It is certainly something that can be addressed. We don't have the answers yet—changes to civic education certainly may be part of it, or some institutions may need to alter their behavior.

里 奇：回到我对真相衰落的定义，这是一个过程，不是最后的状态。这当然是可以解决的。目前我们还没有答案——改变公民教育当然是其中的一部分，或者一些机构需要改变他们的行为。

I see reasons to be optimistic. Even as Truth Decay erodes our political discourse, other areas of American life are benefiting more and more from valuing facts and analysis. American business leaders are more data-driven than ever. They understand that bad facts or faulty analysis can lead to failure or bankruptcy.

我认为有理由保持乐观。即使真相衰落侵蚀了我们的政治话语，美国人生活的其他领域也会从重视和分析事实中越来越多地获得好处。美国商界领袖比以往任何时候都更看重数据。他们明白糟糕的事实或错误的分析会导致失败或破产。

Other professions are also more fact-driven today. Law, medicine, and advertising are finding ways to incorporate more data into decisionmaking. Think of sports. Even baseball teams are all changing how they operate based on what they're learning from big-data analytics. Or philanthropy. It used to be thought of by some as a touchy-feely enterprise. But donors are increasingly focused on quantitative metrics. They want to see evidence about what works and how their gifts can have a positive impact on the world.

如今其他行业也更注重事实。法律、医学和广告都在寻找途径将更多的数据融合到决策中。想想运动吧。就连棒球队都在根据从大数据分析中学到的东西来改变他们的运作方式。还有慈善活动，曾被看作是情感事业。但是捐助者越来越关注量化指标。他们希望看到能证明其效果的证据，看到他们的给予如何对世界产生积极的影响。

On a common-sense level, people understand the consequences of ignoring facts in the physical world. Buildings can collapse or burn when contractors lie about meeting construction standards. We need to show that the effects of Truth Decay in politics can be just as terrible.

在常识层面上，人们知道在现实世界中忽视事实的后果。如果承包商在建筑物达标问题上弄虚作假，建筑物就可能会倒塌或烧毁。我们需要说明的是，真相衰落在政治上的影响同样可怕。

Overall, my outlook is positive. I've spent my career as a leader of a scientific institution focused on public well-being. We base our work on facts and rigorous analysis, and we solve problems. So while I'm a realist, I'm predisposed to an optimism that's based on a forward march of science—and improvements that science has delivered for individuals and communities. Truth Decay may be afflicting our politics, but there's a way out, and a way forward.

总的来说，我认为前景是乐观的。作为专注公众福祉的科学机构的领导，我们的工作是以事实和严谨的分析为基础来解决问题。所以，虽然我是一个现实主义者，但我倾向于一种基于科学前进的乐观主义，相信科学会为个人和社区带来进步。真相衰落也许正困扰着我们的政治生活，但总会有出路，总会向前迈进。

https://www.rand.org/blog/2017/05/howrand-is-responding-to-truth-decay-qawith-michael.html

编辑：胡 梁

注释：

①爱德曼公司是全球领先的传播营销公司，和世界上很多大型新兴企业和机构有合作关系，帮助他们进化和营销产品，保护他们的品牌和荣誉。

②黄色新闻或黄色报刊，是美国的一种新闻类型。它刊登的新闻缺乏认真的调查研究，大量使用夸张的标题，用夸大事件、丑闻等方式来吸引读者，以达到扩大报纸销量的目的。现在，该术语的意义已经延伸到不专业、不道德的新闻方式。

How RAND Is Responding to Truth Decay:Q&A with Michael Rich and Jennifer KavaZznagh

Rand Idea Bank Editorial Team Arrangement, Tao Tao, Hai Jialun Translation

Abstract: The phenomenon of "truth decline" was put forward by Michael Ritchie, president and CEO of Rand Corporation, an internationally renowned idea bank. This phenomenon refers to the tendency to disregard facts and evidence in political life. The Rand Co studied the decline of truth, and defined and described four characteristics of the phenomenon: increasingly difficult to reach a consensus on the analysis and interpretation of facts and data; the blurred boundary between opinion and fact; too many personal views and experiences surpass the facts; doubt the source of trust in the past. Although these phenomena have precedents in the history of the United States, now they have new causes and manifestations. Rand hopes to inspire the public to respect and value the facts through their research.

Keywords: Rand idea bank; Truth decline; Michael Ritchie; Jennifer Cavana; Lack of trust; Social media; False information

[译者简介]陶 涛（1968-），女，湖北荆门人，湖北大学外国语学院教授，教育学博士，主要从事英语教育及有效教学研究。