Who Said "Advanced Society"?
Once upon a time, at the advent of the internet, it was thought that having infinite information at our fingertips would make all of us instructed and better informed. We would see information on different subjects discussed in different ways, and we could create our own informed opinions, based on actual information, and not simply speculation or because we accepted verbatim how our brother-in-law explained something.
Um, no. It's turned out that most people only search for information that will confirm their biases. If that information also calls those who opine differently dumb as rocks, even better. When social media, such as Twitter and Facebook showed up, those with cool heads thought it would mean that people of different ideas would share them and learn to live together. Those with cool heads live on a different planet.
A true story follows.
Jamie belonged to a closed Facebook page that followed the political party she favored. From time to time, she would comment on a post. One day, she posted her opinion on a point in the party's program she differed with. She expected people to agree and others to disagree, both using rational discourse, as she had done.
Rational discourse disappeared with the dinosaurs.
A few people did agree with her, and some that disagreed did use measured language to explain her "error." But the majority called her all sorts of names and intimated that they thought her little better than a slug for even calling into question any aspect of that political party. After about an hour of laughing at some of the comments, she found that she had been blocked from commenting or posting for twenty-four hours.
Given the fact that this political party had always argued against censorship, she found this a bit disquieting. When the ban was up, she posted again, further explaining her thoughts and expressing her belief that censorship was an aspect of the past she had thought would have remained in the past.
The past lives.
Again, there were rational people who agreed and disagreed. Most of those rational speakers also agreed that censorship had no room in that political party. But the majority simply screamed and laughed at her and repeated the name calling. Jamie's intention had been to post her opinion, and after a couple of hours delete herself from the group. She was forstalled by being blocked permanently from it by one of the admins. The admin screamed in a last comment that she had no right to post her opinion on their group, and to go take a hike.
Given that it was a private, closed group that merely followed the political party, and was not an official channel, she understood that there would be people running it that might be excitable and not very open. But she had explained that the point with which she disagreed was just the one point, not the entire platform, which she agreed with in the majority. Yet, the possibility for discourse, for rational discussion which the page had offered, was simply a chimera. Those who ran it and most of those who had joined it, weren't interested in different points of view. They were only interested in propagating their official truth.
My official truth is that people go bonkers whenever they approach a keyboard.
So, instead of promoting rational discourse, social media and internet are probably sowing the next civil war in this country and various others. We've come such a long way as a society, that we're back at the starting point.
Um, no. It's turned out that most people only search for information that will confirm their biases. If that information also calls those who opine differently dumb as rocks, even better. When social media, such as Twitter and Facebook showed up, those with cool heads thought it would mean that people of different ideas would share them and learn to live together. Those with cool heads live on a different planet.
A true story follows.
Jamie belonged to a closed Facebook page that followed the political party she favored. From time to time, she would comment on a post. One day, she posted her opinion on a point in the party's program she differed with. She expected people to agree and others to disagree, both using rational discourse, as she had done.
Rational discourse disappeared with the dinosaurs.
A few people did agree with her, and some that disagreed did use measured language to explain her "error." But the majority called her all sorts of names and intimated that they thought her little better than a slug for even calling into question any aspect of that political party. After about an hour of laughing at some of the comments, she found that she had been blocked from commenting or posting for twenty-four hours.
Given the fact that this political party had always argued against censorship, she found this a bit disquieting. When the ban was up, she posted again, further explaining her thoughts and expressing her belief that censorship was an aspect of the past she had thought would have remained in the past.
The past lives.
Again, there were rational people who agreed and disagreed. Most of those rational speakers also agreed that censorship had no room in that political party. But the majority simply screamed and laughed at her and repeated the name calling. Jamie's intention had been to post her opinion, and after a couple of hours delete herself from the group. She was forstalled by being blocked permanently from it by one of the admins. The admin screamed in a last comment that she had no right to post her opinion on their group, and to go take a hike.
Given that it was a private, closed group that merely followed the political party, and was not an official channel, she understood that there would be people running it that might be excitable and not very open. But she had explained that the point with which she disagreed was just the one point, not the entire platform, which she agreed with in the majority. Yet, the possibility for discourse, for rational discussion which the page had offered, was simply a chimera. Those who ran it and most of those who had joined it, weren't interested in different points of view. They were only interested in propagating their official truth.
My official truth is that people go bonkers whenever they approach a keyboard.
So, instead of promoting rational discourse, social media and internet are probably sowing the next civil war in this country and various others. We've come such a long way as a society, that we're back at the starting point.
Bonkers is the word
ReplyDelete