lie

It is widely known that Orson Wells’ ‘The War of the Worlds’ caused a social panic. It is less known that it is a lie

by

In my years of training as a journalist I remember how they told us to study the radio broadcast of The War of the Worlds. My Radio and Television Information teacher told us that it was an exemplary event that could help us in the future practice of the profession to evaluate the responsibility of the media and to understand the mechanisms by which the so-called “fourth estate” could influence the social reality we serve. What perhaps the teachers who transmitted that information to me did not think is that they were right in what they had told me, but for a twofold and partially wrong reason. The legend of War of the Worlds The story is well known: HG Wells, a widely known science fiction writer at the time, had a story titled The War of the Worldsthrough which aliens would come to Earth to conquer humanity. A beginner but ambitious young man named Orson Welles decided to adapt the script to the radio format, giving it a newsreel structure for his television program. Mercury Theater on the Air on CBS and that he would read with other colleagues on the night of October 30, 1938, on Halloween Eve. The broadcast, the reading of this work, lasted an hour in which the aura of truthfulness was maintained except in three momentsone at the very beginning, another 40 minutes into the recording and another at 55. They indicated that it was a dramatization. For the rest, the fiction of that Martian invasion that was taking place in Grovers Mill, New Jersey, remained live. The myth, the documentaries and reports about the case and the journalism classes I attended said that Welles, the hired actors and the sound montages were so believable (and the audiences so naive) that within minutes of them starting to simulate a supposed alien attack the streets of the country were filled with hysterical and shocked masses. Panic attacks, people stockpiling supplies, collapsed police services and who knows what else. We assume that the people who did not hear those warnings were able to connect to the program after the warning and listened to the program without knowing that it was fake. And why wouldn’t we think like that? The newspapers of October 31 had carried the story to the foreground: “False war bulletin spreads terror throughout the country”, “Radio play terrifies the nation”, “Radio listeners panic, they confuse a war drama as a real chronicle”. These are some of the headlines that could be read about an event that, as it was said later, caused rivers of ink to flow in the form of more than 12,000 articles in newspapers throughout the United States. The reality is that, as a series of experts have reflected on different occasions, this interpretation largely falls into the realm of fake news. To support it here we use, above all, the study of professionals and experts from Princeton University, from the work of scholar David Miller in his essay Introduction to Collective Behaviorfrom the book Getting it Wrong by W Joseph Campbellfrom the work of sociologist Robert E. Bartholomew and from what journalists Jefferson Pooley and Michael J. Socolow have collected for Slate. What events did occur The broadcast did cause some effects. We know that some Grover’s Mill locals, believing their town’s water tower had been transformed into a “giant Martian war machine,” fired guns at the water tank. There was at least one woman who sued Welles and his team for causing her a panic attack and one man received direct compensation from the future film director who paid for the shoes that a listener said he had given up to pay for the train ticket he needed to escape the alien catastrophe. It is also true that calls to hospitals increased from people telling them where they could go to get donate bloodand police stations in the New Jersey area were also called, but most who did this were looking to find out if it was a false alarm. They wanted confirmation that it was a joke, but they also called to protest about this program that could be deceiving people or to congratulate them on that great special on that Night of the Dead. But nothing more. All of them came together to serve the approach that the written press wanted to give: that the CBS program had caused mass hysteria, that the radio was lying and deceiving its listeners and that they had created a major problem. And the lies that were published The rumor that people were being treated for shock in New Jersey hospitals was false, as the Princeton Radio office later revealed. The news that a man had died of a heart attack because of the program, as reported by the Washington Post, was also not true. People didn’t jump out of the windows either. In general, hundreds of articlesmany with supposed witness accounts, witnessed chaos that, in truth, had not been such. I remembered Some time later in his memoirs Ben Gross, radio director of the New York Daily News, that in truth the streets of New York They were half empty. It would also later be known that CBS had disconnected the Welles broadcast in different local affiliates in the country to show regional bulletins that, they assumed, would interest their audience more than a little play by Martians. The biggest scandal of all, the audience figures. It was said that more than a million people had listened to the program, when it could not be true. In fact, most people were listening to the NBC rival to ventriloquist Edgar Bergin’s popular radio show. And with most people we are talking about a 2% audience for the NBC show, as demonstrated by an independent survey that was done simultaneously with the broadcast. There is no doubt that in popular culture the idea that The War of the Worlds was a a before and afterthat the phenomenon must have been … Read more

We have always believed that London is very rainy and that Barcelona is not. The only problem is that it’s a lie

by

Few towns exist so troubled by the vicissitudes of time like the British. During my stay in Cambridge, one of my first conversations with a native revolved around its climate. “Actually, the weather is nice in Cambridge,” he told me, “the problem is Londonwhich has a microclimate where it is always raining.” According to his testimony, London, the city with the greatest international projection, gave a bad name to the rest of the country. The British weather wasn’t so horrible. The truth is that it is: Most of the United Kingdom is cold, lives under a perennial blanket of gray clouds and enjoys greater rainfall than the rest of the continent (especially in Scotland). His story, in fact, was inversely true. Despite legend, London is one of the most dry of the United Kingdom, and a European capital with comparatively little rainfall. So why do we universally believe the opposite? First, let’s look at the data. According to Met Office figuresAccording to the British weather agency, London receives between just under 600 and almost 700 millimeters of precipitation annually (depending on the season: London is a gigantic city). The standard chosen by Wikipedia is Heathrow, east of the megalopolis, where in 2014 they fell 601.7 millimeters. Without further reference, it is a neutral number. How does it compare to the rest of England? On a map: London, the black spot… Of the low rainfall in the United Kingdom. The bluest areas are the rainiest in Britain (north east scotland plays in another league). In general, the North Sea coast is drier than the Atlantic. And as we approach the south, to the English Channel, rainfall reduces. This is where we can find London: a city in which it rains comparatively little compared to its island neighbors. My confidant was wrong: it rains more in Cambridge than in London. “Ok, ok, but the United Kingdom is a very rainy country per se. Just because it rains less in London than in other parts of the island does not mean that it rains in London.” bit“. The reasoning is logical, but also incorrect. The truth is that there are few points in continental Europe that have annual rainfall below of 600 millimeters. Unlike supposedly rainy London, Europe below the Channel does live underwater. Raining many days does not mean raining a lot Let’s think about, without going any further, Barcelona. The beautiful city of Barcelona has a reputation for being sunny. It receives millions of tourists a year thanks to its wonderful, mild and friendly climate. Well, its rainfall is very similar to that of London, and in 2014 it was slightly higher. AEMET counted 640 millimeters that yeardistributed throughout 72 days. The surprising record places Barcelona as a rainier city than London. The same thing happens with other quite amazing points of European geography. For example, Croatia. The most recent milestone of European tourism has also built a reputation for “good weather”, but the climatic reality of the Adriatic is stubborn: only in Dubrovnik, the famous citadel popularized for Game of Thrones, more than 1,000 millimeters of precipitation fall per year. 65% more than in London, of tormented fame. With some licenses, places in Europe where it rains less than in London (in yellow). The best way to understand how wrong our intuition is about London’s climate is the map above, shared a few months ago by a Reddit user: Areas in blue (almost all of central and western Europe, including Italy) receive more rainfall per year than London. Only the areas in yellow are drier, and they are few: specific points in Poland, almost the entire Iberian Peninsula (from the Ebro down, so to speak) and Sicily. Let’s think about two antagonistic places: Helsinki and Lecceon the Puglia peninsula, southern Italy. The first is one of the northernmost world capitals and spends most of its time buried under snow amid terrifying temperatures. How much does it rain there? Well, not much more than in London: about 655 millimeters annually. The second is a baroque jewel with a very sunny summer nestled in the heart of the Mediterranean. Its rainfall? Depending on the year, about 590 millimeters. Such geographical disparity does not correspond to very different rainfall. Which shouldn’t be strange, but it does manage to properly contextualize the importance of rain in London. The London chirimiri, the source of prejudice Now, if London is dry, why do we all think it’s always raining? A Basque would have an immediate answer (despite the fact that the Basque Country is very humid, especially Bilbao): chirimiri. In other words, the thin layer of rain that always grips certain cities but is actually very gentle. This is where the scarce 72 days of rain in Barcelona come into play, a city where it rains on just a few days on the calendar. If you want to look for really humid places in Europe, head to the Alps or the Atlantic ledges. In London the opposite happens: it rains more or less the same, but the water is spread over many more days (110a little less than a third of the year). Helsinki is another story: its rainy/snow days range from 180 in 2010 and the more than 200 from last year. Like many other northern European cities (Cambridge included: I barely saw the sun during the month of January I lived there), London often dawns cloudy and with a thin layer of rain that never seems to evaporate. The sun comes and goes, the clouds appear and disappear, the rain stops and starts again regularly. It doesn’t rain much, but the feeling of rain and humidity is almost permanently, inevitable. That’s why fame is so raw. Another factor is the dry reality of most of Europe’s capitals. Berlin, Vienna, Stockholm, Paris, Madrid, Warsaw or even Copenhagen They have less or only slightly more annual rainfall than London (none exceeds 700 millimeters). There are few capitals in Europe where it rains a lot (Amsterdam, … Read more

We have been believing for decades that wet hair makes us sick in winter. Science knows perfectly well that it is a lie

by

“Don’t go out with wet hair or you’ll catch pneumonia” or “put on your coat or you’ll catch a cold” are very grandmotherly phrases that almost all of us have been told in our childhood and that have been burned into our brains. But the question we can ask ourselves: is this true? The reality is that not directly. The culprit. May we have a cold or flu It doesn’t exactly depend on the cold. The culprit in this case are infectious agents such as viruses, the most common being rhinovirus. The fact that this microscopic germ accesses our body and overcomes our defense barriers causes it to begin to replicate and generate its effect that In the long run it’s really annoying when accompanied by fever, cough and a host of other symptoms. In this way, the equation is quite simple: if there is no exposure to the virus, the external temperature is irrelevant. To understand it, if we put ourselves in the situation of going out to Antarctica with our hair soaked and naked, we would surely die of hypothermia, but we wouldn’t catch a cold unless a penguin sneezed rhinovirus on us. The same thing happens if we are in an environment completely isolated from viruses and at a very low temperature: no infection would occur. The experts. Just as it isExperts from the Mayo Clinic explain and disseminating pharmacistscold alone does not have the ability to spontaneously generate a pathogen. Cold is a physical condition, not a biological agent. And science has been trying to explain this for decades. One of the most cited and relevant studies is the one carried out by the University of Rochester where they separated volunteers into two groups. One of them was exposed to low temperature and cold conditions; the other was kept in a warm and comfortable environment. Subsequently, they were exposed to rhinovirus that causes colds. The result. In this way, it was seen that between the two groups there was no significant difference in the contagion of the virus or in the symptoms they presented. The group subjected to the cold did not have a harsher cold, so the factor in getting sick was solely and exclusively the virus. Getting sick in winter. It is a reality that when winter arrives the rates of people with colds or flu increase greatly, as we are seeing in Spain these days. This makes us think that the relationship really exists, whatever science says. And this is where we give a little point to ‘grandmother’s advice’. Science suggests that rhinoviruses they replicate better at the temperatures we usually have in our noseswhich ranges from 33 to 35 °C. But in addition, the cold temperature also causes our defenses to lower, so it is much easier for the virus to access our body and begin to spread in a much simpler way. And that’s why winter is where we see a higher rate of colds. Other factors. But he is not the only one. The social factor is also a big culprit, because when it is cold the truth is that it is better to be locked up at home with Netflix. But in these cases we would be in an interior space with little ventilation (because it is cold) and very close to other people. In this way, if a person has the virus, the probability of contagion skyrockets in a heated indoor place much more than in an open-air park at 5°C. Another point is the dry environment that exists at this time due to the cold outside and the indoor heating. This causes the nasal mucous membranes to dry out, which is a serious problem for the mucus, which is our first line of defense at the entrance to viruses and bacteria. If the mucosa is dry, its effectiveness decreases and facilitates the entry of pathogens. Wet hair. A special distinction must be made for this myth since today there is no evidence to justify a relationship between wet hair and an increase in viral infections. Going out with wet hair causes a great loss of body heat (since the head has a lot of vascularized surface), which generates notable thermal discomfort. This translates into a feeling of very cold, feeling cold and perhaps accompanied by a headache due to muscle tension derived from the cold, but the humidity on the scalp does not attract germs or facilitate infection. Images | Dmitriy Kievskiy Brittany Colette In Xataka | H5N1 bird flu unleashes a massacre in Antarctica: half of the female seals have already disappeared

I have received more than fifty automated Christmas greetings. They all lie

by

I would love for my next sentence to be an innocent one, but it is completely factual: I have received more than fifty Christmas greetings by email. Not written to me specifically, but automated by companies that thought it was an excellent idea. They all say the same thing with different words, They all pretend a closeness that does not exist. And the most striking thing is not that they do it, but that the person who sends them knows that the recipients know that it is a lie, and they still send them. Welcome to the theater of obligatory cordiality, where we are all actors conscious of acting. These christmas They usually come signed by the communication department, but it is not ‘communication’, it is maintenance of social infrastructure. Like watering a plastic plant: the gesture doesn’t make any sense, but doing it makes you feel better. The company that congratulates you has no feelings for you. The LinkedIn contact who hasn’t written to you in 364 days, either. But both have calculated that the cost of sending you that message (zero) is lower than the risk of you forgetting about them. It is calculation disguised as warmth. It works because we have accepted a tacit agreement: We’re going to pretend these messages mean something if you pretend you appreciate them. Nobody believes anything. But we all participate. The real message is not “I wish you a brutal Christmas” but “I still exist on your radar.” They don’t wish you anything, they only mark territory in your attention. And this contaminates even royal congratulations. We have turned a gesture of affection into a signal so degraded that it no longer communicates anything. Like when you repeat a word many times until it loses meaning: Merry christmas. Merry christmas. Merry christmas. Merry christmas. It doesn’t mean anything anymore. It’s just noise. The bad thing about the system is that it generates its own incentives to perpetuate itself. If you don’t send your massive congratulations, someone will interpret your silence as disdain. So you do it. And in doing so, you contribute to the noise that you yourself hate. Each individual message seems innocuous, but the aggregate effect is the destruction of the meaning of the words. And then there’s the absurd escalation. Because as everyone knows it is a lie, some try to differentiate themselves by adding layers of production. Videos with smiling employees, animated GIFs, Canva designs. As if the problem were packaging. Christmas spam is not a volume problem. The thing is we have forgotten that silence is also valid. That saying nothing is better than saying something empty. But we live terrified of silence, we prefer constant noise. And if you refuse to participate, you will be the odd one out. This is the sad thing: we know that it is a lie, that it contaminates real communication. But we keep doing it. Merry christmas. In Xataka | Calling without warning has gone from being normal to being rude. And in that change we have lost something Featured image | Xataka

This woman has been accused for years of committing the only crime that has taken place in space. It was all a lie

by

Six years ago, his face went around the world. Astronaut Anne McClain appeared in all the media as the alleged perpetrator of the first crime committed outside of Earth. Now we know it never happened. A little context. In August 2019, NASA opened a file to investigate what It seemed like the first crime committed in space.. Astronaut Anne McClain had been accused of identity theft and irregular access to her ex-wife’s financial records while she was on the International Space Station. Specifically, her ex-partner had accused her of “guessing” his credentials to spy on his bank account from space. He had made it up. Six years later, Summer Worden, McClain’s ex-wife and former US Air Force intelligence officer, has pleaded guilty to lying to federal authorities in a twist that definitively closes this unfortunate chapter for the astronaut. According to the official statement From the prosecution, an investigation revealed that Worden had voluntarily shared his credentials with McClain since 2015. The bank account in question had been open since 2018. Worden allowed McClain access until January 2019, at which time he changed the passwords, something he hid to incriminate his ex-partner. Custody of a child as a motive. The accusation came amid a messy divorce and a dispute over custody of a common child. McClain always maintained his innocence, arguing that he had simply reviewed the family finances to ensure there were sufficient funds for the child’s care, something he routinely did with Worden’s consent. The damage to his reputation was immediate and had ramifications and rumors beyond the legal. It coincided with NASA postponing the first all-female spacewalk in its history, starring McClain and Christina Koch. The reason was the lack of suitable suits, but the shadow of the accusation and public scrutiny always loomed over that decision. Redeemed. The resolution of the case comes at a sweet time for Anne McClain. The astronaut has continued working for NASA and, last March, she had the opportunity to return to the ISS as commander of the SpaceX Crew-10 mission. The sentence against his ex-wife will be handed down in February 2026. The maximum penalty is five years in prison and a fine of $250,000. Image | POT In Xataka | How many times have we gone to the Moon and why have only 11 military aviators and one geologist set foot on it in all of history?

A map to lie to Russia

by

Ukraine wore months imploring to the United States to leave rhetoric to go to action. The first sign that something was changing in Washington happened a few days ago, when it was airing that Trump was seriously thinking Send Tomahawk missiles To kyiv. Now, a budding agreement has given the most drastic turn that is remembered in the American postureand has the channel to change the contest. A strategic turn. The Trump administration has given A drastic change in his position towards war in Ukraine. After months of trying to negotiate the fire with Putin through economic incentives, the US president has Authorized for the first time The delivery of intelligence for KyIV Russian energy infrastructure attack with missiles and long -range drones. He objective is Hit refineries, pipelines and power plants to deprive the Kremlin of its main source of income, weakening both their economy and its ability to sustain the military offensive. This turn coincides With statements In which Trump assured that he is possible that Ukraine recovers all occupied territories, which marks a break with his initial rhetoric of territorial concessions. The long -range dilemma. It We count yesterday. Washington now studies whether to accompany that intelligence with armament much more powerful. The more striking option It is the delivery of Crucero Tomahawk, with a close range of up to 2,500 km and large destructive capacity. They are also considered cheaper and more modular alternatives, such as Anduril Barracuda or the new ones EXTENDED RANGE ATTACK MUNIONSalready approved in significant quantities. Germany, France, the United Kingdom and Italy They have sent own cruise missiles, while Berlin Keep blocked The Taurus despite the insistence of their military in which Ukraine must be able to attack in depth. Ukraine, meanwhile, advances with own projects Like Long Neptune and Flamingothe latter a cruise missile of enormous reach and explosive load that aims to produce on a large scale to further press Russian defenses. The Ukrainian “gift. The other great pillar of this new approach is unmanned technology. A Ukrainian delegation arrived in Washington to negotiate A historical agreement that will allow the United States to access kyiv’s experience in mass production of drones. A frame of up to 50,000 million dollars Five years, with the capacity to manufacture millions of units annually when the war ends. The Ukrainian drones (From cheap FPV to The Magura Navales capable of demolishing Russian fighters) have demonstrated be innovativeflexible and much cheaper than Western systems. United States, whose industry manufactures very sophisticated models, but in limited volumes, seeks with this pact catch up on In a capacity that Ukraine has taken much further. Implications The call “Drone Deal” would include technological transfer formulas, from royalties to the creation of subsidiaries on American soil. Ukraine would produce at much lower costs than those of the West, while the United States He would get proven systems in combat and ready to climb. In return, Kyiv expects compensation in the form of advanced weapons such as The patriotthe Himars launches, The attacms or even latest generation fighters. The agreement would also serve to strengthen the political relationship with Trump, which had sometimes shown doubts about the level of support for Ukraine but now seems to bow towards deeper strategic cooperation. A moving board. He American turn It is framed at a time when Russia intensifies attacks against Energy infrastructure Ukraine, anticipating a new winter of pressure on the civilian population. At the same time, Moscow complaint That NATO’s intelligence and resources are used directly against them, while observing with restlessness the possibility that western long -range missiles are delivered to Kyiv. In parallel, Europe reinforces your role: Some countries increase their investments in the Ukrainian military industry and others, Like Germanythey finance in depth attack capabilities. The combination of new intelligence, massive drones and potential long -range missiles indicates that the war could enter into a different phasewith Ukraine looking to hit in the most sensitive for Russia: the energy that feeds Its economy and finances its war effort. Image | National Police of Ukraine, Nara In Xataka | Something has gone out wrong in Ukraine. So much, that the drone war has reached the most unexpected place: Türkiye In Xataka | Ukraine has invoked what Russia vetoed since the beginning of the war. And he told the US to tighten the button: Tomahawk

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.