PLURV decrypted: Your protective shield against disinformation and manipulation

Do you already know the term “PLURV”? If not, that's not a problem. In this article we will explain this term and its meaning. PLURV stands for a collection of five techniques commonly used in discussions, particularly on social media, to distort opinions and deny scientific facts. Caution is advised as these techniques can be subtle and difficult to detect.

We owe the use of the term PLURV to the websites skepticalscience.com and Klimafakten.de . You have dealt with the phenomenon of discussion distortion and science denial and published a diagram on the subject. This diagram provides us with a useful basis to understand and explain the concept of PLURV.

The meaning of PLURV

Now you're probably wondering what exactly lies behind this mysterious acronym. Each letter in PLURV represents a specific technique used in discussions to influence and manipulate opinions.

P is for pseudo-experts

Pseudo-experts, the term that represents the “P” in the PLURV strategy, play an important role in the spread of disinformation and manipulative discourses. But what does that mean exactly? Who are these “pseudo-experts”?

Pseudo-experts are individuals or groups who portray themselves as experts in a particular field without having the necessary qualifications, training or experience. They often rely on technical terms and complicated expressions to make their statements appear credible and to feign authority and knowledge. However, their claims are usually false, misleading or inaccurate.

Pseudo-experts also appear in the media, particularly in talk shows and debates. In such situations they are often presented as a counterweight to real experts in order to create an apparent balance. However, this can lead to a misrepresentation of facts and scientific findings and may mislead the audience. So-called alternative media in particular prefer pseudo-experts if they support the preferred agenda.

The danger posed by pseudo-experts lies not only in the spread of false information. They also contribute to undermining trust in real experts and science. This may have long-term consequences for public opinion and decision-making.

L for logic error

The term “logic error” represents the “L” in the PLURV strategy and is an important tool for manipulation and misdirection. But what exactly does that mean?

Logic errors, also known as fallacies or fallacies, are errors in reasoning that lead to false or misleading conclusions. They arise when correct basic information is interpreted and presented in an incorrect or misleading manner. This can happen consciously or unconsciously and often results in people being misled or deceived.

Logic errors are often used in public discussions and debates, especially when the goal is to promote certain views or agendas. They are often used to strengthen arguments or undermine counterarguments by distorting or misinterpreting the actual facts.

A good example of a logic error is the use of ambiguity or vagueness in an argument. An argument that can be interpreted in multiple ways can be used to draw different conclusions and mislead the audience. Another example is the so-called “stun grenade” throwing. When a person becomes defensive in a discussion, they may try to change the subject or divert attention to divert attention from the weaknesses of their arguments.

The danger of logic errors lies in their ability to deceive people and distort the truth. They can lead people to adopt false beliefs or views and then spread them further.

U for Unattainable Expectations

In the context of PLURV, “U” stands for “Unattainable Expectations”. This is another manipulative tactic to control and influence debates. But what exactly does that mean?

Unattainable expectations are, as the name suggests, expectations or requirements that are unattainable, that go beyond what is realistic, fair, or reasonable. They are often designed to be virtually impossible to fulfill in order to weaken or discredit the opponent's position.

Unattainable expectations are often used as a manipulation technique in discussions or debates. They can serve to place an unfair demand on an opponent that they cannot meet. This can make the opponent's position appear weaker or make him appear untrustworthy.

A classic example of unfulfillable expectations is what is known as “moving the goalposts.” This is where the initial requirements or criteria for success are changed or increased over time, often after they have already been met. This makes it virtually impossible for the opponent to meet the requirements because they are constantly changing.

The danger of unattainable expectations lies in their ability to unfairly influence and manipulate discussions and debates. They can lead to people or views being discredited or marginalized, regardless of their actual merits or the strength of their arguments. Therefore, it is important to be aware of how unattainable expectations work and how to recognize them in order to protect yourself from such manipulation.

R for cherry picking

In the PLURV acronym structure, the “R” denotes cherry picking. It is a common technique in discussions and debates that is used to confirm a preconceived opinion by selectively presenting the information that supports that opinion, while ignoring or omitting any information that might contradict it.

Cherry picking is the deliberate selection and presentation of information that supports a particular position while simultaneously neglecting or ignoring other information that might challenge that position. It is a form of confirmation bias in which the cherry-picker tends to seek out evidence that confirms their pre-existing beliefs and ignore or reject evidence that contradicts those beliefs.

In discussions and debates, cherry picking can be used in many ways. Some examples of this are:

• Selective presentation of statistics or data: Only the data that supports a particular position are presented, while other relevant data that might contradict that position are not mentioned.
• Use of anecdotes: Personal stories or experiences are used to support a position, even if they are not representative of the general situation or population.
• Selecting specific experts or sources: Only the opinions or research of experts who support a particular position are cited, while the views of other experts who might challenge that position are ignored.

Although cherry-picking can be an effective strategy for supporting a preconceived notion, it also carries significant risks. It can lead to a distorted or incomplete presentation of information and can distort the understanding and perception of important topics. Therefore, it is crucial to be aware of the cherry-picking technique and to recognize and question it in discussions and debates.

V is for conspiracy theories

Within the PLURV acronym, the “V” stands for conspiracy theories. They can play a particular role in discussions and debates, being used as a tool to manipulate perceptions and cast doubt on established facts or scientific knowledge.

Conspiracy theories are hypotheses or belief systems that attempt to explain the world around us. They rely on the idea that a group of individuals or organizations secretly work together to control or manipulate certain events. Typically, conspiracy theories are based on assumptions or conjectures that often provide inadequate evidence for their claims and go against accepted scientific or historical findings. A more detailed explanation of this HERE .

Conspiracy theories are often used in discussions and debates to cast doubt on scientific findings or official reports. They can help strengthen one's position by providing alternative explanations or "secret" information that supports one's point of view.

Some conspiracy theories can also serve to challenge and undermine the status quo by claiming that a powerful and secret group has control over important aspects of our society. This type of conspiracy theory can cause people to develop distrust of institutions and authorities and question their credibility.

Conspiracy theories can be dangerous because they are often based on misinformation and misunderstandings and can lead people to have incorrect ideas about reality. They can lead to distrust and paranoia and can undermine the social cohesion and stability of communities.

Recognize the strategies

So next time you're on social media and find yourself in a discussion, remember the PLURV strategies. Knowing these techniques can help you recognize and counteract manipulation.