|
Perhaps what we are experiencing is a return to the mean, and what we should do rather than vitiate against the death of a single mass narrative is to embrace the bunkerization and compartmentalization of news into whatever hearsay is shared among our close groups of affiliates, our echo-chambers. That's essentially what we ran on for ages - in our villages and tribes - before the rise of mass literacy and newspapers, and perhaps the rise of small group-chats on all forms of social media is a return to that.
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2023 15:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 16:03 |
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:This would be catastrophic. There is in fact an objective external reality and descending into culturally mediated relativism does great harm to our ability to function. The sharing and spread of truthful information is necessary to society. I'm playing Devil's Advocate here a bit, so please forgive me, but let's pick this apart a bit. How would it do great harm? Or rather, how is journalism per se necessarily the conveyor of truth? That is to say - why is it assumed that journalism has a one to one correspondence to truth? On the converse end, what is the actual relevance or significance of knowing a truthful fact about something which is out of the power of the knower to influence? Say for example, you live in France, and on Le Monde, you learn about a grain silo explosion in Nebraska - the largest grain silo explosion in recorded history. It's a truthful bit of information, but barely has any relevance to you except a momentary glimmer of interest.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2023 16:52
|
|