Category: misinformation

Information Age Morality

We are about seventy-five years into the sociocultural evolution of the Information Age. So, how are we humans doing culturally and emotionally at this point in time? Pretty poor I would say…Poor in mind, body and spirit.

This standard of “poor” needs some serious discussion. Innovations of digital technology have progressed the most rapidly during this period. How unfortunate that illiteracy has also progressed. Whether due to laziness or miseducation, we must admit that our reliance on the information we receive or transmit through these technologies has diminished our capacity to understand each other with deep humility and honest compassion.

Pick your poison…

My engineering degree mostly strengthened my technical writing ability. I hated my reading and writing assignments in high school because the topics were not very interesting to me. Who needs Shakespeare and Tolstoy when regarding the bigger picture of life? Turns out that all of us need this rigorous education. I am so glad for the exposure to these pre Information Age literary guides.

Now that I am much older, I read and listen to the classics with enjoyment and appreciation. While reading and listening to newly produced information I tend to assess the content against the information standards of decades ago. I find that many of our modern cultural expressions in news, literature, motion pictures and lyrics are devoid of our natural human capacity toward Godly standards of metaphysical growth. Can this observation be applied to our current crisis in mental illness? Absolutely! Examples can be found in many current narratives.

For example; the next time you read or listen to a news story please look for the following criteria:

1) The headline matches the story’s content.

2) The content covers the who, what, when, where and why effectively.

3) The author addresses any missing information and commits to providing it in a future story.

4) The author uses caution to prevent misjudgment on behalf of the reader.

5) The author does not judge the people in or the content of the story unless they are editorializing.

6) The author points out that any anonymous source has actual first hand knowledge specific to this one event.

You can add a several more days to that headline lol

If what you read or hear does not follow the above noted norms, then the author is probably creating a biased narrative. There is nothing wrong with biased narratives, however the author must be up front about the content actually being an opinion piece rather than actual news.

It is immoral to present fantasy as fact. This narration of information has been happening far too often in our current culture…Media and literary pundits must pick a lane and confess their implicit bias practices before we all become ignorant slaves to the content that they generate. Otherwise we will quite literally lose our minds. Perhaps that is the goal?

I Dis Missing Information

It seems as though no one is willing to seek the truth anymore. Why is this so?

News headlines, especially on social media sites, intentionally lack specificity of facts in order to grab the reader’s attention. Missing facts IS “misinformation”…One needs to read the actual article to understand the context of the headline. Even then, one must scrutinize the language used in the article. The reader will scroll through multiple advertisements before they get to the main points of the article, and even then no relevant information will be revealed. It’s almost as though the journalists are complicit in a game of chess where cash is king. Well, many of them are complicit!!

But journalists who work within the corporate news media are only the “so called” messenger. Content comes from elsewhere. Let’s think about this because events are happening around us all the time. The events that are news “worthy” are typically what make the headlines. Journalists must track down the events, report relevant facts, and interview key sources without bias, conjecture and judgment. Words like “alleged”, “purported”, “claimed”, “unsubstantiated” are needed in a first report. If the reader/listener is not seeing/hearing these words in a first report then they are apt to misinterpret the story.

Hi standards can tumble and be easily washed away.

Likewise, an awful injustice can be done by simply reading or listening to hearsay that has no corroborating evidence. Oral history might be noteworthy, but should be taken lightly. Repeating something over and over does not make it truth. Repeatedly publishing someone else’s hearsay or leaks to the press does not make it truth.

I dislike any journalism based on the above stated flimsy methods. Let’s stop factualizing unsupported narratives and not reporting missing information. This is actual misinformation, and corporations who advertise within it are culpable of the worst kind of cronyism.