Talk:Big lie

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Semi-protected edit request on 26 April 2024[edit]

Fulcrumreset (talk) 07:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC) Please add these two balancing lines and include the trusted source:[reply]

1).The Big Lie that the UKRAINE conflict began in February 2022. 2). The Big Lie that NATO has not expanded EAST of Berlin since Perestroika

Add a trusted Reference :

   Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika
   Arms Control and the End of the Soviet Union: A Personal Journal
   By: Scott Ritter Fulcrumreset (talk) 07:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As should be painfully obvious, Scott Ritter is not a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 08:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"big lie" vs. "the big lie"[edit]

Is the definition applicable outside of politics and international relations? Do political scientists define it as a propaganda technique? If the answer is "no", then it's just an adjective that describes the comprehensiveness of any untruth that isn't necessarily a conspiracy theory.

The sections of this article cite instances when a politician used the propaganda technique to spread a conspiracy theory. Other sections (e.g. 21st-century use by American conservatives) acknowledge that opposing politicians have also misappropriated the label ("big lie") in order to redefine its usage. If its definition is subjectively defined depending on the propagandist, then the definition becomes unreliable because there's no widespread agreement on what is true. rootsmusic (talk) 20:03, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

??? It's about really BIG lies (as in obvious to any normal person) that are boldly and deliberately REPEATED. Such things tend to become aspects of propaganda and conspiracy theories. Don't you agree? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 01:54, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"...there's no widespread agreement on what is true."' Unfortunately, that turns out not to be the case in many instances. Somethings are backed up by facts, they are said to be "true". Other things are backed up by hyperbole, argumentation, supposition, and non-factual statements, these are "false". When the false things are really large and endlessly repeated for political or propaganda purposes, they are "Big Lies", no matter who tells them. The most notable recent Big Lie, for instance, is that Joe Biden did not win the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election because of massive voting irregularities. It remains untrue no matter how many times Donald Trump and the MAGA folks who dominate the current Republican Party repeat it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:35, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Sorry, I'm striking my previous questions because they were too rhetorical. Hopefully, my point below can explain why I find this article confusing.)

This article's title is "Big lie". Then the U.S. examples cited under Subsequent use introduces "the big lie", which shares two words with the article's title and adds a preceding article word. These are different phrases that this article defines very differently.

Under Donald Trump's lies of a stolen election, the first paragraph is about "big lie propaganda techniques". Then the second paragraph introduces "the big lie" as a label, but that label isn't defining any propaganda technique. Biden labeled the joint effort by two Senators to contest the election results as "the big lie". Others used the label to refer to Trump's false claims about massive election fraud but not to the propaganda technique that he employed to spread false claims.

In the subsequent section, American conservatives have appropriated that label to other controversies. So the label's appropriation is unreliable, because it's subjectively appropriated.

Instead of attaching "the big lie" to this article (which was originally about a propaganda technique) "the big lie" should be either a separate article or perhaps it can be moved into the article about election denialism. --rootsmusic (talk) 05:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]