My favorite case is the Errol Morris documentary Mr. Death. It follows the story of a man who went from an electric chair technician to a holocaust denier. Morris attempted to direct the movie from the subject's perspective so that the audience could understand how you could slowly become a holocaust denier.
When he showed the movie to a Harvard film class, half the class believed that Morris himself was a holocaust denier, and the other half of the class believed the subject's (holocaust denying) side of the story, specifically that the Auschwitz gas chambers never actually had poison gas in them.
A more recent one was a Mermaid mockumentary, even though they are honest about being completely fictional in the credits there are still people that believe they were real documentaries sadly.
"'Carlos' was the name of a 2,000-year-old spirit allegedly channeled by José Alvarez when he toured Australia in 1988."
The hoaxing presenter (Richard Carleton) did not even tell his co-hosts and they were pretty mad at him.
that hoax is my favorite because the BBC did it. I will let each enjoy the the story and video
The reception of Adam Curtis films speaks to this.
Holocaust deniers aren't people that just haven't heard of the event because they weren't paying attention in nineth year. They believe that there's a global conspiracy to perpetuate a lie, and that that conspiracy is effective enough to fool most of the world (but not them!).
I don't think sending such a person to a lecture told by "them" is going to change their mind. It's much more likely to perpetuate their persecution complex.
In a couple of countries you can go to prison for saying that the holocaust didn't happen. It's Germany, and Poland (where Germans made the biggest camps where they killed most over 3M Polish Judes).
The most funny thing is how uneducated journalists are. Or maybe that's made on purpose.
They still write "Polish Death Camps" while there were "German Death Camps in Poland". Also huge number of journalists write that there were Nazis, not Germans, despite the fact that the Germans chose Hitler in elections.
Also, it doesn’t seem to be very well-known that the Nazi party never achieved a majority of the popular vote in the German republic. Hitler only got 30% of votes in the March 1932 presidential election. A few months later, the Nazi party reached their high point in the federal elections of July: they succeeded in getting 230 members elected to parliament, giving them 37% of the vote. No party could form a majority sustainable coalition government so this was followed by another federal election in November 1932. This time, the Nazi party actually lost 34 of their seats, giving them only 33% of the vote.
Unfortunately, the chancellors that had been appointed by von Hindenburg, the victor in the 1932 presidential election proved to be ineffectual and von Hindenburg eventually appointed Hitler as chancellor in early 1933. This was soon followed by the Reichstag fire which provided Hitler and the Nazis the opportunity to consolidate their power. The rest of this history is fairly well known.
To be ready for college, it's more important to have critical thinking skills, to understand that not everything you heard in high school is true.
In fact Michelson and Morley were amongst the first successful experiments around it - and fundamentally disproving it of course.
The mushroom thing was just a silly joke and a not very popular one at that.
I personally think it was brilliant, but I have a knack for absurdities.
More info (in Russian): https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BD...
A less formal article: http://lurkmore.to/%D0%9B%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BD_%E2%80%94_...!
BTW, another similarly popular joke is that Putin is a crab.
In early 90-ies freedom of speech, I was impressed by a newspaper which was proving that apes evolved from human (and lower animals evolved from apes). Arguments were taken from school biology textbook (gills in human embryos, fossils, etc).
...and the Youtube links still work too!
It was a time when commercial advertisements, tabloids, rumors like that were starting to become popular and people who haven't dealt to seen those things before were really fooled into believing them.
They were used to government propaganda and were inoculated and skeptical against that alright. Lenin being a mushroom, or the story about scientists who drilled the deepest borehole and hit hell and a creature with red eyes popped out of there. Or aliens landing. Or anyone remember https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Kashpirovsky? people were glued to their TV waiting for their diseases to be cured.
There was also other more insidious propaganda from years before manufactured by KGB. It had a department devoted to planting fake stories in western media to undermine credibility of Western countries. One evil one they created was that AIDS was created by the American scientists to kill black people https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_INFEKTION
I'm not sure where the hoax interpretation comes from. The atlas obscura article seems mostly sourced from Wikipedia, or vice versa, it's hard to tell. Calling it a hoax may be more of a western misinterpretation, one that reveals a bias in believing the Russian public was unsophisticated and easily fooled.
Also sometims truth is stranger than fiction. Nature's prior art is a mushroom that takes over ants: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophiocordyceps_unilateralis
The following article explains how the game The Last of Us expands this concept until human victims turn into mushrooms: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/but-not-simpler/the-fun...
"Yurchak says that it wasn’t that the viewing audience was any more or less gullible than they are today, it’s just that people, everywhere in the world, have a tendency to believe what the TV says"
>So it would've been a very self-aware performance, aimed at an audience that was attuned enouh to pick up on the humor.
Except they didn't. Up until today, there are people - equivalent of American lizardmen believers going around preaching around that the story was true.
>Calling it a hoax may be more of a western misinterpretation, one that reveals a bias in believing the Russian public was unsophisticated and easily fooled.
And the Western commentators were 100% correct in that. There was and still is a class of public in Russia that will believe anything coming from a "reputably looking official in a suite." This was the extend of Soviet three letter services brainwashing powers. They learned a lot from herr Goebbels.
Now look, these former three letter services servicemen are doing the exact thing in US. Russian propaganda in US does not target any much normally politically active population, no they target the kind of people believing in bizarre stuff, and with a remarkable success. The still raging, so called, "pizzagate" is a proof.
But mushrooms aren't plants.
Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate. If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it.
But the title? It's just silly.
> Correlating the existence and use of hallucinogenic mushrooms in both Russia and Mexico, Kuryokhin posited that drugs had ultimately inspired the successful propaganda of the Russian revolution. In fact, Lenin had consumed so many mushrooms that their fungal “consciousness” had completely consumed him in return. By the end, Kuryokhin put it plainly, saying, “I have absolutely irrefutable proof that the October Revolution was carried out by people who had been consuming certain mushrooms for many years. And these mushrooms, in the process of being consumed by these people, had displaced their personalities. These people were turning into mushrooms. In other words, I simply want to say that Lenin was a mushroom.” He also made references to mushrooms being made out of radio waves, as if he didn’t already sound crackpot enough.
So no, "Lenin was a mushroom" was just a figure of speech.
Edit: The hoax was that he used psychedelic mushrooms, and that they "inspired the successful propaganda of the Russian revolution".