Is there a name for this type of behaviour (wanting things to be correct and publicly correcting others without realising that it’s a social blunder), other than ‘dickish’ which seems to be favoured in this thread? It seems to me it’s quite a common personality trait.
I don’t think so. I know Hacker School calls the act of doing so the “Well, actually…”, which they have a rule against if you attend. (“No 'well, actually’s”). But I don’t think there’s a word for the compulsion/type of person who does it. Except maybe “pedantry”, but that’s a bit more general.
If somebody claims something in my office, I’ll send an email to them privately. The most recent one was that plasters have been banned from first aid kits. If possible, I link to the original story and why it’s been corrupted (normally because of a tabloid rag using it to bang a particular drum).
I don’t bother bringing it up in general conversation any more, because the greatest culprits always focus on the fact that I’m correcting them rather than the fact that they’re demonstrably wrong.
I think people just hate to be corrected, because they don’t like knowing they were wrong. So a lot of the “you’re such a DICK for correcting me”, has nothing to do with you, but with the fact they are mad about being taken by a stupid rumor.
Personally, If it comes in an email sent to a lot of people, I look at the content. Some glurgey thing about how some president always wore pink underwear, I’ll just respond privately. If it’s something possibly dangerous, like “pouring bleach on a burn will heal it instantly!”, I’ll reply all so nobody injures themself. If it’s on facebook or the like, just a link to snopes.
I find that the kind of people that accept the correction with thanks are the kind of people I want to be friends with. The kind of people that get pissed off that they were wrong, I didn’t want to be friends with anyway. So it’s a win-win - misinformation corrected, people I dislike quit bothering me 
It will be more tolerable if you don’t use made up words like the last.
When you knee-jerk want to correct things, I would try to remember how many times in your life you have been wrong and no one’s corrected you out of politeness. It happens more often than you think, and IME people who are always correcting other people have a tendency to believe they are never wrong.
As others have said, correct only if it’s important, and in that case, don’t just correct. If you can correct you can also take the time to post some informative factual information.
“OMG rapists look for girls with long hair, especially ponytails, so they can grab them and pull them by their hair!”
“Actually, rapists pick all kinds of girls, ____.” Etc.
I guess it depends on who it is.
I know that all of my friends would be receptive to such a thing because my friends all tend to enjoy learning.
When it comes to family, acquaintances, and everyone else, I generally don’t bother. I am not trying to be stuck up, but I think most people truly don’t value reality. If it’s a good story or something fun to believe, then why let the facts get in the way of that?
I don’t understand the mindset, but oh well.
I either make the correction, or I drop them as FB friends. I just can’t take the willful ingnorance it takes to post something that it should be obvious is BS, and then all the stupid “wow, did not know that” follow up posts from people. Mostly I just drop the person, it’s part of a program I have to clean up my FB from the over the top religious, the right wing nutters, and the look at my kitty pic people (I reckon my FB friends will end up being about 3 people, most of whom I talk to every day, anyway).
The question behind this thread is the true definition of fighting ignorance, which this forum purports to do. I think a gentle, polite correction is not out of line. Anyone who gets their feathers ruffled because of it is willfully ignorant.
Someone’s wrong on the Internet.
But sometimes we do deserve to be called on some BS we’re spreading, in which case doing so politely is appreciated – too many just take glee in throwing the correction like a slap to the face.
Devil’s advocate: aren’t a lot of people in this thread just winking and nodding at the spreading of actual factual inaccuracies which, thanks to the Internet, will now propagate as actual truth, crowding out truth in the minds of thousands/millions of people? IOW, “Spreading Ignorance Since 1973 (As Long As People Find The Lie Amusing)”? Surely that has its own negative consequences?
There’s a difference between the OP’s “funny but apocryphal stories/pictures” and what Kenm colorfully describes as “email full of shit forwarded to them by U.S. fundie fruitcakes of the thousands-of-coffins and reservations-in-Montana-set-aside-for-American-citizen-concentration-camps-after-they-take-our-guns persuasion.”
To correct the first is being pedantic, or, if you prefer, stepping on the joke’s punchline.
To correct the second is a sacred obligation.
If you can’t tell the difference between the two, that’s just sad.
[QUOTE=Jragon]
Right, I understand people feel that way, which is why I usually don’t, but it confuses me. To me, the point is to add to their enjoyment. To give more layers to the anecdote, and expose the rich history and evolution of how such a story came to be told the way it is (as much of it as is known at least).
[/QUOTE]
If I’m telling a funny story with a punchline that involves the Alamo, and you come in to inform everyone that the Battle of the Alamo was actually about Texas independence and not a part of the Mexican-American War, I don’t see that as an attempt to “expose the rich history and evolution of how such a story came to be told the way it is.” I see it as just a case of you showing you think you’re smarter than I.
That’s me too. In general I’d want to be corrected, because if at some point I do find out that my story about Julius Caesar is wrong, I’d feel embarrassed that I told people it. So I’d rather find it out sooner rather than later, so I would end up telling less people.
A gentle correction would be important. If someone said I was misinformed, I’d be open to hearing it, but if they said I was an idiot for believing and spreading that stupid story, then I’d probably get defensive. Also, it’d probably depend on what subject it was on. I’m not an expert on history, so I wouldn’t feel terrible if a story I thought was true about Caesar was actually false. But I know a lot about some other subjects, like engineering and music, and if I had a story or fact related to one of those subjects that someone tried to correct me on, I’d probably be a little defensive. Hopefully I’d check on the facts and not be a jerk or apologize to the person if I was a jerk, but I know I don’t always act perfectly.
The thing is with Facebook is that other people are reading. If Jragon’s friend John Doe posts an untrue story about Nero, then Jragon could send a message to John to correct his false knowledge. John may or may not appreciate it, but it won’t be in public. However, another one of John’s friends James Smith might read the story and think it’s interesting, and repeat it to others. Also, nearly everyone experiences source amnesia fairly often. If James remembers that the story was from someone posting it on Facebook, then he might not put too much credence into it. But after awhile, he won’t remember if the story was from Facebook, or hearing it at a bar, or seeing it in a documentary, or learning about it in his college history class.
If it’s just an amusing story, I probably wouldn’t bother to correct them. But if it’s making a point about something important, like politics or health, I would be more likely to post a correction. Or actually I probably wouldn’t offer a correction anyway out of laziness, but that would be my philosophy.
But I’ve read many stories of outrageous things people believed, and their huge embarrassments when they found out they were wrong. Where they mention the story or fact at a party, and get laughed at by people thinking what huge idiots they are. Not a lot of people are experts on Nero, so it’s possible that this embarrassment would never happen to John or James if they repeat the story about Nero. But it’s possible that they could be a party where some history majors are, or could meet someone who knows about Roman history. I’d rather be embarrassed on Facebook, where no one can see me cringe, and I could delete an embarrassing post if needed, rather than people laughing at me in person about a stupid story I told.
This is true. I hate it when people think that they are always right and can never accept that they could be wrong. I do know a lot, but I don’t know everything, and I try to be gracious when I’m proved wrong. Someone who would be super angry and me for correcting them would probably not be someone I’d want to interact with often anyway.
I guess one big question that would affect the answer (touched on by other posters) is whether the joke IS a joke, or whether it actually IS spreading misinformation.
I get in trouble for this all the time. A friend posted something that was pretty glurgey - I agreed with the sentiment (a matter of personal faith), but some of the statements in the text were flatout wrong (and libelled public figures), and others were misattributed/misrepresented.
So I did post, pointing out (with cites) the inaccuracies. I also supported the sentiment, but commented that I could not personally accept defending a faith position that I hold to be true with material that was flat out false.
My friend went away to reflect (which I appreciated), but some other readers were vehement in their opprobrium. They felt the message trumped the delivery mechanism. My friend eventually returned and gave a cautious acceptance to my points - I think I got pretty close to losing an old friend, but fortunately didn’t.
I am somewhat more cautious now, but sometimes I am just burning to correct some misinformation. Fighting ignorance is important.
I try to see it from the other person’s POV. If I had posted something inaccurate, would I want to know? Yes, always.
Would I want someone to reply to all, pointing out my error? Probably not, I’d probably prefer to issue the correction myself, if necessary.
So I just respond to the poster.
Although…I have a vague memory of some years ago correcting a “gang initiation” email with reply to all. And, er, the person who sent the mail being my mom. I hope I’m just misremembering that…
It’s fine, as long as you say it like “I heard that’s a myth” or “That’s so weird I have a hard time believing it happened.” Then make a compelling case with “I seems to me…” or “I read that…” Just don’t act like a know-it-all authority on the matter.
It’s the know-it-all attitude that bugs people, not the correction itself. (Well, except for rather insecure people–but they’re your friends, so you should know who those are.)