The Post-Truth Era and Mission

Cheol-young Lee

Head of the International Affairs Research Association

In 2016, the Oxford English Dictionary chose “Post-Truth” as the Word of the Year. The dictionary defined it as “circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief” (Oxford English Dictionary, 2016). This definition is noteworthy because it explains that the concept of post-truth does not merely mean that there are more lies, but that even though facts still exist, they no longer carry decisive persuasive power. Truth still exists, but people do not trust it; instead, they respond more strongly to narratives and emotions that confirm what they want to believe and that reinforce their group identity. This shift has had a profound impact on politics, media, and society at large.

A symbolic event of the post-truth era was the Brexit referendum. At the time, one of the most widely spread campaign slogans was: “The UK pays the EU £350 million a week. Let’s spend that money on the NHS.” Yet this was far from the truth. Once rebates and investments returned from the EU were taken into account, the actual contribution was only about half that amount (Rose, 2017). Nevertheless, this message stirred public anxiety, and emotional anger and dissatisfaction—rather than rational analysis—became a decisive factor in the outcome of the vote. Brexit was recorded as a political event where emotion triumphed over fact, and many scholars see it as the event that marked the beginning of the post-truth era.

Alongside political turning points like Brexit, the rise of fake news played a decisive role in the spread of post-truth. Fake news packages entirely or mostly fabricated stories in the form of news reports, posts them online and on social media, and spreads them through people’s clicks and shares. This is not merely humor or mischief; it is systematically produced and consumed in connection with political and economic interests. In societies with deep political polarization, fake news serves to reinforce the convictions of each camp. Providers exploit conspiracy-driven narratives that readers are already inclined to believe, creating the impression that they are revealing “truths” hidden by mainstream media or authorities. While the immediate goal is often ad revenue, politically the effect is to sow distrust of the opposing camp and paralyze democratic consensus-building (Rose, 2017).

Thus, the post-truth era is not simply an era where truth has disappeared, but one in which truth, though it still exists, no longer holds decisive persuasive power. People do not follow truth as much as they listen to claims that feel familiar, emotionally resonant, and affirming of their identity. Hannon (2023) notes that it is a misunderstanding to describe this phenomenon as simply “the death of truth.” People still believe in truth, but only regard as true the claims that come from sources they prefer. Therefore, post-truth should be understood not as “the end of truth,” but as “the collapse of authority regarding truth.”

Why then has this post-truth era come about? Scholars suggest several reasons. One of the most important is anti-expertise. Fuller (2018) explains that during the Brexit process, the economic and political analyses put forward by experts were overwhelmed by the political slogan of “the will of the people.” The warnings of experts not only failed to convince the public but actually triggered distrust, being perceived as an “elite conspiracy.” This shows that expertise no longer carries persuasive power in mass politics.

Bennett and Livingston (2018) argue that as democratic institutions and traditional media have weakened, traditional knowledge authorities such as scientists, journalists, and experts have lost credibility. As a result, the public has abandoned formerly reliable sources of knowledge and now follows only the information channels and media they prefer.

Hannon (2023) goes further, pointing out structural factors within democratic society itself. Democracy places pressure on every citizen to have an opinion on national matters, which forces people to express views even on issues they do not truly understand. In this process, people are reluctant to admit ignorance and instead pretend to know, resulting in irresponsible statements unrelated to fact—in other words, an increase in “bullshit.” As this culture of citizens acting like experts spreads, public discourse no longer revolves around truth and fact. Davies (2016) likewise explains that this anti-expertise culture has become an important soil for post-truth politics.

This naturally extends to the realm of mission. The hallmark of the postmodern era was the perception that there is no universal or absolute truth. On mission fields, many people simply followed their religious traditions without deeply questioning whether they were true. Being born a Muslim and living as a Muslim was not so much a matter of truth as of identity. Yet within this situation, souls with a genuine hunger for truth were often ready to receive the gospel, because Jesus Christ is not merely one religious claim among many, but “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6).

However, if the influence of the post-truth era spreads into mission fields, the situation becomes far more complex. Now it is not simply indifference to truth, but the increasing phenomenon of firmly believing lies as though they were truth. Platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and TikTok already exert powerful global influence, and mission fields are no exception. These media package religious extremism, conspiracy theories, and political agitation as “truth,” delivering them to local populations, who often accept them uncritically. Thus today, the gospel is not merely confronting indifference, but must engage with firmly entrenched false “truths.” This poses a serious challenge for missionaries.

Of course, not every soul is indifferent to truth. In fact, such post-truth phenomena may have been deeply rooted in mission fields long before. A representative example is the Jewish people. Unlike other religions, Judaism affirms the Old Testament. Yet despite regarding the Hebrew Scriptures as foundational, Jews do not easily accept the gospel. Jesus revealed, beginning with Moses and all the prophets, that all Scripture testified about Himself (Luke 24:27), but Orthodox Judaism rejects this. The reason is not simple indifference, but the presence of an alternative “truth” deeply rooted through centuries of rabbinic tradition, anti-Christian sentiment, and national identity. In other words, the Jewish people possess a powerful collective narrative that both venerates the Old Testament and at the same time excludes the gospel. This is why Orthodox Jews, though they read the Scriptures, do not recognize Jesus Christ as the Messiah within them.

In conclusion, the post-truth era is both a serious crisis and a new opportunity for the church and for mission. The more the world trivializes truth and is swayed by emotion and identity politics, the more the church must stand as a clear beacon of truth. On the mission field, the gospel must not be presented as merely a claim or theory, but demonstrated through life and love. Indeed, in a world awash with counterfeit “truths,” disillusioned people will ultimately search for the real thing. Counterfeits always mimic the genuine in order to persuade, but the gospel, being truth itself, does not deceive or force conviction. The gospel shines as light even in darkness, because it is truth. Therefore, the church must be the community that reveals “Christ Himself, who is the truth,” in a “world without truth.” Though the world constantly shakes, truth never does. Now is the time for the church to once again cling to the Word of truth, proclaiming God’s truth over the empty words and lies of the world.

Reference

Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2): 122–139.

Davies, W. (2016). Post-truth politics and the social sciences. Environmental Sociology, 3(1): 1-5.

Fuller S. (2018). “Post Truth” Cambridge University Press.

Hannon, M. (2023). The politics of post-truth. Critical Review, 35(1–2): 40–62.

Rose, J. (2017). Brexit, Trump, and post-truth politics. Public Integrity, 19(6): 555–558.

Suiter, J. (2016). Post-truth politics. Political Insight, 7(3): 25–27.

Oxford English Dictionary. (2016). Post-truth, adj. and n. In Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press.