Source of Fake News Found!

Sometimes starting a new post is like turning over an exam paper to find there isn’t a single question you can answer. Like poor Manuel in Fawlty Towers, you know nothing.

Just such a calamity is described in a 1954 book The Exam Secret by one Dennis B. Jackson, BA (Hons):

What are you to do? Gaze blankly at the ceiling, awaiting divine inspiration? Panic madly? Sit gibbering? Hand in your papers and stalk out of the room grumpily? Throw a fit? Vomit? Despair?

No! You must do none of these. The situation is vital. There is a battle to be won. And the great weapon in your armoury is – “The Gentle Art of Bluff”.

You must “waffle”. And you must choose good questions suitable for “waffling” …

I well remember my dad chucking this book in the bin when he read this rather  questionable advice. My dad was an honourable and conscientious man who would have done enough work to answer every conceivable question they threw at him. By contrast, I tended to skimp on revision and was curiously attracted by the idea of lying to the examiners – which is what Dennis B. Jackson, BA (Hons) advocated.

He blithely suggested the unprepared candidate make up bogus quotations by imaginary experts while entertaining the examiner with plenty of little jokes and anecdotes. All would be well as long as you sounded purposeful and kept saying you were answering the question when you obviously weren’t. Helpfully, he provided a sample answer with lots of outrageous bluffing.

Hmm, so this is where all the trouble started!

Recently I picked up a second-hand copy of this book – a later edition – and noticed the following footnote from the publisher:

It is not the job of a publisher to be a censor … My own view is that exams are about the most beastly test which man has yet devised, and it’s time he found some truer method. Thus I feel the pupil’s integrity is not seriously damaged by the use of bluff when short of knowledge.

The point I want to make is rather to warn all that I think most of us would have to be awfully careful, especially in making up quotations, not to have our bluff discovered. Few are so gifted as the author of our book!

What a spoilsport! He admits himself the system is unfair. Well, I for one will continue to write about things I know nothing whatsoever about so long as the world keeps sending me questions I can’t even begin to answer …

 

Image result for exam

 

Image: Swanwick Hall

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Source of Fake News Found!

  1. Fake news is too rampant now. One of our government depts was misquoted or rather had a bout of fake news by an Aussie paper. Sadly this is now in a stage of clarification between countries. People should not do this as it is wrong to sensationalise or report the wrong stuff and inflame or hurt the truth. Sigh!

    1. Indeed. And truth is easily hurt, as is communication between people. A worrying development is that the word of experts is being doubted – even governments don’t consult them enough, preferring populist appeals.

  2. “The best obtainable version of the truth” is Carl Bernstein’s mantra – he with Bob Woodward exposed the Watergate scandal – and truth is a slippery thing (just look at what has been revealed in those political papers which are published 30 years or more after events).
    But fake news is deliberately created and much more dangerous. My attitude to personal lying is that it is so much easier to tell the truth, if you don’t then you have to remember what you have said – and that is much harder. Professional lying ought to need a conspiracy to make it work and conspiracy is difficult to maintain.
    But these days if you tell a lie often enough and loudly enough the population believes it.
    Are we really so gullible??
    (Did you hear about the print run of a dictionary which had to be pulped because the word “gullible” had been omitted?)

    1. The whole truth is always a slippery concept and it’s good to be reminded of the ‘best obtainable version’ idea. I’m with you about truth being easier to maintain, Mike, though often hard to determine in the first place. But in the public sphere it seems that negatives stick and election/campaign run-ups too short for reasoned debate. Prejudice seems to win out, alas.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s