Originally Posted by zoetmb
This also applies to politics and is something the Republicans understand much better than the Democrats do. The Republicans are actually genius at this, turning "liberal", "socialist" and even "sympathetic" into dirty words.
So Democrats never toss around "conservative", "fascist" and other concepts? And your railing against intellectual laziness?
Talk about ironic!
In spite of the fact that more people in the U.S. are attending college than ever before, we seem to be getting incredibly dumber in almost every respect: analysis of arguments, understanding of politics, the value we place on learning and literature, etc.
The problem is critical thinking is a tool. It's not something that can be taught like facts or math skills. And to truly hone it you have to use it often, read voraciously and expose yourself to ideas that you may not agree with. Heck, you might even have to accept that every once and a while your sacred cow may not even be that sacred! All it takes is looking at Internet communities to discover just how popular that is with people.
Internet echo chamber indeed.
There are other forums I participate in and in some of them, 80% of the contributors sound like they learned English as a second language.
That's because it's socially acceptable to write like an idiot. If someone points out bad spelling or language use they are a "grammar nazi" or worse, a square (or <insert other pejorative here>)
Even some of the most supposedly financially successful people in this country (and I won't name names here) don't seem to have basic writing skills.
In some ways computers have been wonderful tools. But in others they have really done damage to basic intellectualism. In reading, I do notice my vocabulary and spelling has decreased significantly because I no longer read
. I browse on the Internet, reading snippets (of often malformed english) here and there. When I actually read books it was much different. I was in a different frame of mind - more focused and in tune to what I was doing. I've been saying I am going to read less on the computer and go back to reading at least a little the "old fashioned way" - thanks for giving me the impetuous to do so!
And it's not just reading. Words are cheap. When you can type out at a keyboard and make wholesale edits with the whack of a mouse or stroke of a few keys, you don't have to pay attention much to what you are doing. Gone are the days of typewriters and carbon where every action was a deliberate one or you had to re-do lots of work! The discipline of writing has shifted, that's for sure. I'm not saying I want to go back to the typewriter, but there needs to be some way to capture a little of the deliberation of old.
Talk about another ironic moment, forum writing like this is probably the worst for enforcing the "off the cuff" and "little forethought" habits as well. Ack!
We are focused totally on meaningless trivia. People obtain college degrees who can't tell you the approximate year the Civil War started or the name of the Vice-President or even who we fought against in World War II, but they're genius at sending out 200 tweets a day or what Lady Gaga is up to or whether the stars of Twilight are romantically involved. And we let these people vote.
Sadly this is nothing new, nor will it ever likely change. The methods and means for triviality may change but it will always be there.
Personally I see the future as predicted in several Sci-Fi stories where everyone jacks into a virtual universe and then goes extinct from inaction.
We're becoming less mature and our media is a reflection of who we are, so I think internet journalism will continue to become less mature as well.
It ebbs and flows. It's definitely ebbing now...
We used to make distinctions as to how we behaved when we stood on a street corner and how we behaved in places such as offices and schools, but now we make no distinctions whatsoever and in forums like this one, people seem to have no problem whatsoever with using "WTF" as the totality of their argument.
lol - I used to have a link to an essay from the 1800's complaining that society was becoming more "casual". While I don't really wish to go back to formal cards for introductions, courting and other concepts are are pretty arcane and foreign, I do agree that there is a more constructive middle ground that as a society we are leaning a little to far towards the opposite spectrum.
And just as many people can't tell the difference between Fox or MSNBC commentators and news, they no longer perceive a difference between bloggers and journalism.
I don't know about that. On MSNBC and Fox it's pretty easy to pick out the editorial content from the hard journalism since the legitimate commentators tend to emphasize their commentary.
What I have a problem with are journalistic outlets that are traditionally "hard only" editorializing. Much of the grinding against Fox and MSNBC is from people who are simply intolorant towards the expression of views that are contrary to their own. It's less an issue of the news and entertainment organizations and more an expression of their own immaturaty and selfeshness.
No one has the right to not be offended or challenged in their thinking
So yes, you can dream. I think we'll see mature journalism on the internet just around the same time that Apple loses its arrogance and paranoia.
Mature Journalism is an oxymoron.
Apple is not arrogant or paranoid. What many people express as arrogance is Apple confidently stating: "This is our product, it's the best we feel it can be. If you agree, please buy it. If not, feel free to go to our competitors".
That's a far cry from "Apple is arrogant because they refuse to produce a trash under $500 PC - all these other manufactures can do it so Apple is just being arrogant and elitist!" Apple is about experience, first and foremost - and the experience of a cheap PC - if you are honest - is a pretty crappy one. So they choose to not be in that space. If you are willing to put up with the experience of a cheap PC, more power to you. It just won't be with Apple. That's not arrogant, it's discriminatory. They know they can't be all things to all people, so they choose to focus on that which they can excel at. It must be pretty smart, since with a fraction of the market they have vaulted past the likes of Microsoft and just about everyone else.
Same thing with features on phones, the app store vetting process and all the other things that people love to pillory them for. The "walled garden" stuff with Apple is the most amusing. If you don't like it, don't buy any iOS devices! But why can't Apple present and foster a different model? Simply because a few whiny developers and web pundits don't like it? Oh well, sucks to be them. There are plenty of people like my father for whom the walled garden approach with the consistency and stability it brings are exactly what they are looking for. So why would anyone want to deny my father the right to choose his experience?
Were back to selfishness and intolerance of thought that differs from their own...
As for claiming Apple is paranoid that's a bit over the top too. Apple isn't paranoid, they realize information is power. I have a feeling we are going to find out a court-assigned value to such early information as I'm sure the Gizmodo thing with the iPhone 4 prototype is FAR from over. If pre-release information didn't matter, then there wouldn't be scads of regulations around insider trading and disclosure laws for publicly traded companies. To label simple prudence as paranoia is more than disingenuous.