Hannah and Papa J

Hannah and Papa J

Sunday, November 20, 2016

In defense of fake news sites

Dear Hannah,

The great value of a page like Shares from your Aunt is that it proves what we already knew about the elderly: that they are too old.  Perhaps nobody since the turning of the millennium has ever so accurately caricatured the embarrassing aunt on Facebook, and done it so convincingly that our aunts are likely to take the posts seriously.  An unwavering credulity, accepting even the wildest assertions and conspiracy theories; a mangling of minor facts in embarrassing ways that accidentally make them important; a tendency to crusade over the stupidest and most irrelevant things comprises the gist of the web-page, which is unintentionally the gist of many of our aunts.


Our elders are embarrassing in an attempt to make the internet meaningful.  Almost everything they do, from the SHARE IF YOU AGREE posts about veteran dogs to their WHO'S WITH ME about saying Merry Christmas to their sharing of news from the most dubious sources, culminates in a picture of a person who not only lacks the talent to persuade anyone in anything whatsoever, but is also incapable of being persuaded if necessary.   Their reading caters only to their prejudices.  With every post they prove an almost incredible defiance not only of taste, but of proof.

Hence the eye rolls from disappointed youngsters.  Hence the calls from The New York Times and The Economist and other magazines to censor Facebook.  Hence the horrible feeling that our republic is being subverted not only by powerful interests and rich men driving us toward a consolidation of power, but by slanderous bloggers and partisan kooks steering us toward a world of chaos and factual anarchy.  The Age of Information has meant that we may learn whatever we want to learn.  The first problem is that not all of us are interested in learning.  The second problem is that too many of us are only interested in learning what is comfortable to learn.  The third problem is that many of us are not testing to see whether what we are learning is true.

In no segment of our population is this proved more powerfully than by our elders on the internet.  Nearly all of us are aware that the elderly are susceptible to con-artists and their ridiculous scams.  Few of us thought when we were younger that the same susceptibility would bleed into our politics.  But while we have remembered the credulousness of our aged, we've forgotten that the Age of Information is an age; and that like all ages it has a beginning.  The introduction of the internet absolutely meant that each of us would encounter new truths that nobody would have told us before.  The introduction of the internet also means that each of us now encounters lies that nobody would have told us before.  The difference between the youthful and the elderly (and I don't mean to downplay on my own generation's number of idiots) is not that one of us is smart and the other is dumb.  It's that in the Age of Information, the elderly are very young, and the youth are very old.

If this seems confusing, I ask the reader to consider the following.  When we factor into the mix that every single one of us personally adapts to a particular environment, we add the possibility that the environment may leave us behind.  Simply put, our elders are childish on the internet because they were never on the internet when they were children.  And like the French discovered that years of servility had made the Frenchman incapable of good government after The Revolution; and like American blacks discovered that ex-slaves didn't know how to run anything right after emancipation, Americans are discovering that old Americans are bad at sifting information after the introduction of the internet.  Yesterday, we got everything primarily from the media.  Today, we get everything from almost anyone.  There is going to be a period of adjustment.

That is why The New York Times is calling for regulation.  Not because Americans are being oppressed.  Because they believe Americans are too free.  Because the Baby Boomers, like college students learning to possess their sexuality around beer bongs and easy women, are learning how to deal with the most extreme liberation of information since the introduction of the Gutenberg press.  The New York Times ought to give Americans some time.  The Millenials ought to spare America another decade.  Our laughing at our aunts is right because they are ridiculous.  But it also proves that none of us ever think we'll be old.  It shows that we have an expectation, for so few of us likely to ever actually come true, that the world will never leave us behind.  We will never be laughed at like we laugh at our parents.  We'll be laughed at in ways we have yet to imagine.

The great virtue of my present rising generation of Millennials (and I say this with great pride, as it is thus far one of our only virtues) is that we are natural skeptics.  We've been raised in a world where everything could be false, which leads many of us to examine things to see if they're true.  If we don't (yet) understand political theory, and few of us (being young) have come to realize our ignorance, conspiracy theories are less likely to take us by surprise, and the posting of one is likely to end in public derision.  We roll our eyes at many wild accusations and ask for sources from the moonbat.  Many of us (like our parents) are slacktivists -- and many more of us are vocally critical of slacktivism.  And this may never make any of us geniuses or wise men or even informed.  But it will have a tendency, if The New York Times and Facebook do not squash it, for our media to actually be freer than before, and for us to be better judges than our parents of what comes out of it.  In this we have a chance to be superior.  And the mark on our tombstones, if we are wise enough first to be worthy of it and second to realize it, was that we were the first generation to experience the madness belching from the soul of a newly freed and recently connected mankind -- and that we were able to see right through it and laugh.

Your father,
-J

PS: About a week after writing this I realized I forgot to mention something that was only implied: that when I was young, I was just as much a fool as the people I described in the essay.  To help you or anyone else out who reads this, I've decided the best way to get over being propagandized is to have three news sources on each end of the political spectrum, and follow them regularly.  You don't have to read all the articles they publish, but pay attention to the headlines, and read anything that sticks out to you or presents a view you've never heard before.  Currently, for the left, I read Salon Magazine, The Daily Kos, and The Atlantic.  For the right, I follow Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro, and The National Review.  For a basic overview, I follow The Drudge Report and The New York Times.  I also follow The Seattle Times, as everyone should be aware of what's going on locally.

Each of these is strictly for information.  For my philosophy -- for the way I ought to view the world and approach it -- I head to my library.  You will find almost nothing really good from these papers.  You will not become a great person by reading these papers.  You will not even become educated by reading these papers.  You will become informed about the world by them, and if you supplement them with serious reading from serious books written mostly by history's great dead men, you will become a wise person.  To read these papers is to get knowledge.  To know what to do with that knowledge, you will have to look elsewhere.

I have each of these set to "see first" on Facebook, because otherwise Facebook will hide their posts from me.  I'm in the habit of ignoring articles from strangely named newspapers, and if strange papers have an article that is too interesting to ignore and too probable to disregard, I see whether they direct me to reputable sources' sites -- like the FBI, or other articles buried in the respectable papers above.  That ought to do it for you.  If this all seems overwhelming to you, ask yourself whether it is more overwhelming than being a slave.  If you would rather not be a slave, follow the papers so you can know what powerful people are doing.















No comments:

Post a Comment