"Shotgun" chain emails can be political or not, as well as be considered junk or not. Political ones, "likely bogus" according to FactCheck.org, occur when one person/organization sends out ("shotgun's") an email to many other persons/organizations, and asks everyone to pass it on. FactCheck.org, according to Wikipedia "is a non-partisan, nonprofit website that describes itself as a 'consumer advocate' for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics.' It is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania, and is funded primarily by the Annenberg Foundation". See their video: "Just the Facts 2010: E-mails"
A "shotgun" can be used for good or bad purposes, as shown in the cartoon above. It all depends on the motives/expectations of the person doing the shotgunning. Some contain chain attachments which make them like scary chain letters, since they may be virus emails even when the forwarder emails friends. Many people consider it bad etiquette, but that depends on the ego of who receives it, and what is sent, IMO. Personally, I like it when someone sends me a personally interesting/informative one through their email "BCC" function, while disclosing that they are doing that. This way, my email address is kept private from everyone elses. The problem is that most people don't really know what is personally interesting to all their receivers, and what is agreeable to their receiver's opinions!
Recently, one of my relatives sent me one of those politically slanted "shotgun" chain emails that many of us will see more of as we near the November, 2010 elections. It reminded me of the old west's "lynch mob" mentality where basically good people behave badly by trying to become "judge, jury, and executioner" without legal evidence about some politician, or it could even be about "your neighbor" next door. Some of the time that "lynch mob" assumes what is in another person's heart (motives), which only God can know for sure. My relative's email was about his strong opinion that Barack Obama intentionally lied when he said that his father served in World War II. Here is a video clip of that speech:
Here is a
rebuttal of my relative's opinion .
Snopes.com is similar in their goals to FactCheck.org, and it ends up saying that Mr. Obama should have said "grandfather" vs. "father", since only his grandfather served in WWII. Snopes.com also suggested that despite the generational difference in age, Obama might have mispoke due to having been influenced by the fact that "his grandfather was the primary paternal figure of his childhood."
Why more people don't question the "whole truth", and "nothing but the truth" of what is in these emails, and too readily believe the worst about people, comes down to this, IMO. People believe what they want to believe (what agrees with their opinions), and don't want to search for the whole truth due to PRIDE. They don't want to be proved wrong with legal evidence or common sense logic. I realize common sense logic is subjective vs objective, but there is such a thing as a "
Freudian Slip" which is what the COB of BP Oil did, IMO, when he said the keywords "the small people" referring to the people of the Gulf.
His Swedish language orientation obviously didn't mean (IMO) to imply in a derogatory way what "small people" can imply in English, but maybe he does have an elitist mentality? I'll leave it to God to make that judgement. Barack Obama didn't mean to imply, IMO, that his birth father served in WWII, but he probably thinks of the "father figure" who he spent most of his childhood with as his life's experience "father"? I'm not defending, in totality, Mr. Obama or the COB of BP as I disagree with both of them on some specific issues. I'll leave the judging of who they are to God, and only try to form a correct opinion about what they do. We must all separate people's "who" from their "do". These explanations make common sense logic to me in both cases, plus I try to think the best of people until legal evidence changes my opinion.
Not only did my relative forget to have proper, privacy driven "shotgun" chain email etiquette, but I felt like he was participating in the
DEFAMATION of another human being by making Obama guilty before proven innocent. Forgetting for a moment that most of these libral, left wing Democrat or conservative, right wing Republican viral emails have half truths in them which means that they spread lies, too many people today watch cable news channels, get filled with "FUD" (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt), and that results in anger. They repress that anger, but when the repressed anger builds up over time, many fall into
PAPD behavioral traits like obstructionism, resentment, complaining, and originating deceptive, anonymous, "shotgun" chain emails.
Also, it is a sad truth that "
False political advertising works, and that's no lie", and that many times these political emails are really "political advertising" originated by political parties, and done in the guise of ordinary, "small" people. In that article above on false political advertising, Dr. Carolyn Lin, a communications professor at the University of Connecticut says: "
The unfortunate thing about political advertising, is that when you tell lies, these lies often stick, and the liars never receive any penalties."
It is my opinion that most of these politically slanted viral emails are true WMD's, as they come from negative, destructive FUD, are "shotgunned" to many people, and perfectly represent some of the 7 Deadly Evils ( Pride, Envy, Greed and Anger). This makes it harder for people to counteract those deadly sins with some of the positive, constructive 7 Virtues (Humility, Kindness, Charity and Patience). It is also my opinion that the extreme "
Separation of Church and State" that for many years atheists have promoted for schools, legal courts, etc. has taken it's toll on too many people. If you take God out of life's equation, then you leave only a void where the 7 Deadly Evils thrive.
Deception certainly comes through half truths, and if you tell or hear a lie long enough, it can become the truth for you and others. Voters ("buyers") need to hear the whole truth from all the politicians and political news sources (the "sellers"), including what is said online so they can make informed political decisions from the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Thank God, for
FactCheck.org, and
Snopes.com reviews of political email content. Even though it is possible that they may not be perfect 100% of the time, it is better to have them than to not! I like what FactCheck.org said in a response to a 2010 "Mailbag" comment entitled
"Bias Accusations Unfounded": "We invite anyone who believes we have missed a false claim being made by a liberal (or a conservative) to send particulars to [email protected]. We are always looking for falsehoods and misleading statements to debunk, without regard for which side they come from."
