“When the facts are fairly and honestly presented, truth will take care of itself.” William Allen White (1868-1944)

I saw this quote the other day and it got me thinking about current and recent events: claims of doping amongst athletes, the apparent prevalence of libor fixing and assertions that President Obama’s Clean Power Plan is not viable or even worthwhile, for example.

The eighth edition of The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines truth - perhaps not surprisingly - as ‘the quality or a state of being true or truthful’ and ‘what is true.’ What may be surprising is that it also defines truth as ‘what is accepted as true.’ And therein lies the rub - if one accepts something as being true, changing that perception can be difficult, even if the validity of the truth is called into question.

I am reminded of attending my first tutorial when I began studying with The Open University. The tutor asked me why I wanted to study the environment and sustainability. My reply was that I was fed up with listening to so-called experts putting forward arguments and counter-arguments (about climate change), and wanted to learn enough to be able to make an informed decision for myself. The tutor told me that I would end my studies with more questions than answers. And she was right.

But what I did at least realise through study, was that these ‘experts’ or ‘scientists’ would frequently provide only those ‘facts’ that supported their case, often because of their own particular agenda (and, sometimes, because of where their funding came from). So these facts can often be far from fairly and honestly presented. Sometimes even the science itself can be misleading - as James Burke once said “The trouble with science is that it isn’t an exact science.”

W A White (author of the quote above) was a newspaper editor, which I find somewhat interesting. Accepting that my own views about newspapers are rather negative, for very specific reasons, I wonder - would Mr White say that today’s newspapers laid out facts fairly and honestly? Or would he consider their reporting to be politically biased, or perhaps concerned more with increasing circulation than offering truth?

By now you must be wondering, dear reader, where all this is leading. And in truth, as I write this, so am I. But I have long held the view that we are sometimes a little too accepting of what we’re told. I have often encouraged others to question - not people necessarily, but assumptions particularly - about what is factual. Individually we may not be able to do much about libor fixing or athlete doping, but we could be more circumspect about what we’re prepared to accept and hold accountable those who would assert their version of truth. And we should be accountable ourselves too!

Bryan