I received an email forward today from a friend warning me that Obama’s health care bill now imposes a 3.8% tax on every single home sale in the US. My friend is very conservative, although prior to Obama’s presidency he was actually quite apolitical.

Judging by how long it took me to scroll to the bottom of the email chain to find the actual text of the original sender’s email, the email had been forwarded to many, many people. At no point did any of those individuals ask whether the content was actually true.

Of course, the email’s content was false. While a 3.8% tax has been imposed on some real estate transactions, it only applies to profits from the sale of your home exceeding $250,000 for individuals or $500,000 for married couples. It will have an effect on a small number of Americans- certainly not all Americans.

Now, I know my friend has access to the internet which is, without a doubt, the single greatest source of information the world has ever known. He did, after all, send me an email. I assume his computer can not only use email but can also access Google, as can all the others who forwarded the email before and after him. It would have taken literally one single Google search to discover the email’s claim was false. We are talking about a time investment of less than 30 seconds, maybe one minute if you are a slow reader. So why is it that not only my friend, but countless others who forward questionable or even totally fabricated content, don’t bother to first check and see if the content is true?

My friend is bright. He completed college, then medical school, graduating high in his class in both. Stupidity isn’t the answer, at least for him.

I suspect part of the answer is that being overly partisan makes even implausible remarks about the opposing side seem more believable and realistic- perhaps so much so that one doesn’t even consider that the implausible remarks may actually be false. Perhaps part of the answer is that one wants the remarks to be true because it reinforces the narrative that person has constructed about the opposing side. More maliciously, perhaps the person even knows the remarks are false but thinks the recipient of his email forward will not know they are false and will be persuaded to support his side (this, I think, requires a fairly low opinion of one’s email recipients and a Machiavellianism that would be surprising at this low of a level of the political process). Alternatively, perhaps the email sender is simply gullible, believing most content that arrives in his inbox and feeling a duty to forewarn others of the world’s latest problem (or let them know Microsoft really WILL pay them $500 if they forward a Microsoft ad email to enough people!).

Whatever the reason, it is bothersome. Those who hit “forward” without checking the facts are becoming mere pawns in somebody’s larger political game (or turning the recipient into the sender’s pawn). It’s not helpful or productive to the advancement of any meaningful value.