Bogus Emails and How to Stop them

For a couple of years now I have been blogging about chain emails, especially the type that:

- come from a friend of a friend;
- have been forwarded numerous times;
- are about politics, religion, or patriotism; and/or
- contain right-wing conspiracy theories or similar fringe ideas

I really enjoy debunking these things, and I did so again yesterday in "Friend of a Friend Has No Shame." After reading that post, a couple of people asked for pointers on how they too can help expose and ridicule the crazy, pretentious, or malicious messages that populate their in-boxes. For what they're worth, here are my thoughts:

1. Read the excellent article, "That Chain E-mail Your Friend Sent to You Is (Likely) Bogus. Seriously." at factcheck.org (see link below). [Some of the following ideas come from that article, which was posted March 18, 2008.]
2. Be suspicious of any message the author of which is anonymous or supposedly a famous person.
3. Be wary if the message is full of exclamation points or errors in spelling and grammar.
4. If there's math involved, check the math yourself.
5. If the message asserts that is it true, it probably isn't. (For example: "This is NOT a hoax!")
6. Finally, as the factcheck.org article suggests, the more times something is forwarded, the more likely it is to be false.

Don't be gullible. Use a healthy dose of skepticism, and double check everything before you forward it. To do so, check out any references the author cites, or use one or more of these links for verification:

factcheck.org
snopes.com
truthorfiction.com
urbanlegends.com

Of course the easiest way to deal with these silly hoaxes is this: just hit the "delete" key.

Reflections on Disappointment

I fear writing things that are inane or banal. To paraphrase Dorothy Parker, such material should not be tossed aside lightly; it should be thrown with great force. So it is with some considerable trepidation that I approach the following mundane, ordinary, humdrum, self-evident, tell-me-what-I-don't-already-know, inane and banal proposition: "Life is Full of Disappointments."

My father had a motto: "People are no damn good." He would say this with a twinkle in his eye and an impish grin on his face because he didn't totally believe it. But I think it was his way of anticipating disappointment. He knew that if we continually depend on other people for our happiness and well being, we will eventually get screwed because even our closest friends and family members will fail us sometimes. Reminding himself that "people are no damn good" was his way of preparing for those times when people would live down to his expectations of them.

I remember Dad's motto because in recent days I have been a sounding board for a number of friends who've suffered some significant disappointments. These were not simple things like losing a bet or not getting a job. Each one involved the person's hopes and dreams being dashed by someone who had not lived up to expectations. Through no fault of their own, my friends felt let down, frustrated, defeated, or demeaned. And they let disappointment, resentment, or anger eat at them.

Lord knows I am no psychologist, but I think it is a spiritual axiom that whenever I am disturbed, no matter what the cause, there's something wrong with me. If someone offends me or makes me angry, I am in the wrong too. 

When I first heard that concept I thought, "You're nuts! It's the other guy's fault. He made me feel this way." But upon reflection I came to realize that nobody can make me angry or upset unless I permit them to. My response to a situation is what matters, and the choice is mine. As Prince Hamlet says about Denmark, "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." (Hamlet, Act II, scene 2.)

Another Psych 101 principle is that most anger comes from fear. I don't mean real "fight or flight" fear, but fear based on imagined threats. In my friends' situations the fear boiled down to a kind of separation anxiety.  People whom they cared about had betrayed a trust or ended a relationship, and my friends were afraid of being emotionally alone. This phantom fear turned into anger, and thus they let a situation they had no control over gnaw away at their insides.

Kahlil Gibran wrote in The Prophet, "Much of your pain is self-chosen." Proverbs says, "As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he." The Serenity Prayer asks for wisdom to distinguish between what we can change and what we can't. Self-help guru Stephen Covey distinguishes between the Circle of Influence and the Circle of Concern (respectively, the things we can control and those we can't).

However you express it, the point is that I have little or no control over what other people do or think. The irony is, however, that the better I am at dealing with what I can control (i.e., myself and my reactions to situations) the wider is my circle of influence and greater are the effects I can have on other people through my example.

If this little essay seems elementary (inane or banal), just consider it another exercise in dealing with disappointment. But if you find a grain of truth here, pass it along to the many of our fellow humans who frequently feel let down by others and who, therefore, are in a perpetual funk about things they can't control.

___
P.S. The following is from Stephen R. Covey's The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People.  Covey writes, "Proactive people focus their efforts on their Circle of Influence. They work on the things they can do something about: health, children, problems at work. Reactive people focus their efforts in the Circle of Concern--things over which they have little or no control: the national debt, terrorism, the weather." To this latter circle I would add: other people.

# # #

Friend of a Friend Has No Shame

It's been a while since I've commented anywhere about bogus claims made in emails. I used to have a blog called "Stupid Email Forwards" to discredit such stuff, but it wasn't worth it. Like oil in the gulf, lies and misinformation gush out too fast to be stanched by one person's efforts. 

These days, however, I'm writing articles about health reform for a national association, so when I came across the following message I couldn't help but do a little investigating. Here's what the incoming "friend of a friend" email says:

   "I just got this from a friend and am passing it on to you for your information.  This is supposed to be part of the new Health Care Bill that will be starting next year. I thought Obama was just going to raise taxes on people making 250,000 or more? Well this isn't a tax increase but when you take away, Tax Exemption, it will sure feel like a tax increase....

   "Starting in 2011 (next year folks) your W 2 tax form sent by your employer will be increased to show the value of what ever health insurance you are given by the company. ... The dollar value (cost of what the company pays for your insurance) will be considered income and added to your gross pay. You will be taxed on the total.

   "You will be required to pay taxes on a large sum of money that you have never seen. ... Not believing this I researched the summaries and here's what I read:

   "Sec.9002 'requires employers to include in the W-2 form of each employee the aggregate cost of applicable employer sponsored group health coverage that is excludable from the employee's gross income.'

   "Joan Pryde is the senior tax editor for the Kiplinger letters. Go to Kiplingers and read about 13 tax changes that could affect you. Number 3 is what I just told you about.  Why am I sending you this?  The same reason I hope you forward this to every single person in your address book.  People have the right to know the truth because an election is coming in November. Here's some of the CHANGE for you."

This, of course, is BS. I have the health reform law in front of me, and all section 9002 does is require information about so-called "cadillac health plans" to be included on W-2 forms. W-2s are information forms. Just because something is reported there doesn't make it taxable. Any tax that is owed will be paid by the employer, not the employee. (See section 9001.) 

Joan Pryde at Kiplinger knows this, of course. As recommended, I went to her article and "Number 3" reads:  "A requirement that businesses include the value of the health care benefits they provide to employees on W-2s, beginning with W-2s for 2011. The amount reported is not considered taxable income." (Emphasis mine.) So much for people having the right to know the truth.

Finally, "Friend of a Friend" conveniently omits the lead paragraph of Ms. Pryde's article, which I quote:

"The new health care reform law is chock-full of new taxes and tax increases that will affect many individuals and businesses, but it will be years before most of these hikes take a bite out of your -- or your company’s -- wallet. The law also has tax breaks to help both individuals and small businesses pay for insurance."

Memo to "Friend of a Friend" -- Have you no shame, sir? At long last, have you no decent respect for the truth?