Recently, the world was shocked by the sudden news of the death of the renowned intellectual, father of modern linguistics, and political activist Noam Chomsky. However, this information turned out to be a fake news, spread by media eager for sensationalism and views. Messages with the news link arrived from all over the world. Nobody, from Scotland to Chile, passing through Turkey and Germany, took a minute to verify the veracity of the heartbreaking news.
The rumor of Chomsky’s death spread like wildfire, flooding newspapers, news portals, and social media worldwide. The fake news even reached the ears of people who have never read a book by Chomsky and were asking, “Who is this Chomsky that everyone is talking about?”.
Weeks before, I knew through Valeria, Chomsky’s wife, that he was hospitalized in Brazil, accompanied by her in the difficult recovery process from a stroke he had in June 2023. Disturbed by the spread of this false information, I wrote to Valeria on WhatsApp, and she confirmed that Chomsky was still alive and recovering from his delicate condition.
This episode seemed ironic to me and reminded me of the theory that Chomsky himself presented in his book “Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media”, where he analyzes and exposes the media’s ability to distort reality and manipulate information to shape public opinion and maintain the status quo. The false death of Chomsky is a clear living example of manufacturing perception or what Chomsky calls, alluding to Gramsci, as “common sense”.
In his book with Edward S. Herman, Chomsky argues that the media act as filters, selecting and presenting information according to the interests of those in power, that is, a conglomerate of individuals and corporations elites, that set the “informative” guidelines. In this case, the dissemination of fake news about his death responded to the search for audience and sensationalism, regardless of the veracity of the information or the impact it could have on society.
The proliferation of social media has amplified the reach of this type of fake news, allowing them to spread quickly and reach a large number of people within minutes. The lack of information verification and the ease with which it is shared on social media have created a breeding ground for misinformation, manipulation, and also for shaping common sense.
I will use the example of the invasion of Iraq to illustrate how the mechanism pointed out by Chomsky works:
First, a context is created: before the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the United States government, led by President George W. Bush, argued that Saddam Hussein’s regime possessed weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and had links to terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda.
Critical intellectuals and academics value his intellectual rigor, his commitment to truth, and his courage to challenge dominant narratives.
Sources are selected: the mainstream media relied almost exclusively on government officials and "experts" linked to the government. Few opportunities were given to critical voices or independent reports that questioned the claims about WMD.
A narrative frequency is constructed: the government’s claims about weapons of mass destruction and alleged terrorist links were repeated frequently. Headlines, news programs, and articles had similar narratives, reinforcing the message.
Next, dissent is marginalized: opposing opinions and evidence were marginalized. Reports from UN inspectors that found no evidence of WMD received less media attention compared to government statements.
The next step was to simplify the conflict: at this step, the media simplified the reasons for war, omitting discussions about historical context, geopolitical implications, or economic interests related to oil.
At the end of the chain, the discourse was legitimized: the largest news platforms legitimized the official narrative by not rigorously questioning government sources and by presenting military actions as necessary and justified.
The result is well known: a large portion of the American public came to accept the official narrative about the need for war. This consensus facilitated support for the invasion, despite the lack of concrete evidence. The United States invaded Iraq, never found the weapons of mass destruction, and succeeded in overthrowing and killing Saddam Hussein.
Someone might ask: What benefit is there in spreading fake news about Chomsky’s death?
Such news has an emotional impact that can be used to demoralize those who see Chomsky as a reference and inspiring figure in their struggles and activism, creating a period of uncertainty.
Noam Chomsky has played a crucial role in various activist struggles through his intellectual and ideological work. His influence has been vital for immigrant solidarity organizations in the southwestern United States, providing them with inspiration and guidance. In the student movements, the current demonstrations in support of Palestine find in Chomsky a legitimizing figure. Union movements in Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico have also drawn from his ideas, using his ideas as a basis for their struggles and demands.
Critical intellectuals and academics value his intellectual rigor, his commitment to truth, and his courage to challenge dominant narratives. Independent journalists see in Chomsky a model of committed and critical journalism. His ability to mobilize international public opinion is indisputable.
Chomsky has been a consistent critic of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories and has advocated for a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders. He has also explicitly supported the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement, initiated in 2005, whose main goal is to exert economic and political pressure on Israel to comply with international law and the rights of Palestinians. This movement calls for boycotts in various sectors, including consumer goods, culture, academics, and sports. Chomsky, alongside numerous academics—including the renowned theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking—and various academic and student organizations, has supported the academic boycott of Israel.
The loss of Chomsky would represent a demoralizing blow to these sectors, whose members have relied on his intellectual framework and leadership as a source of inspiration and legitimacy for their struggles.
Noam Chomsky’s political, scientific, intellectual, and ideological legacy will continue to live on. Like all human beings, Chomsky will die one day, but his legacy is immortal.
Meanwhile, Noam Chomsky is alive and and kicking