Tweet
Lounge, not for a moment would I hazard to speak for Big Train here, yet I can offer the benefit of my own experience in the matter.
Leading up to the 2004 election, I was part of a loose-knit group of folks that found themselves thinking in like manner about the state of the government. This ersatz think-tank was also a terrific reason to throw parties and BBQs on the weekends. Of the 35-40 of us involved in this activity, upon speaking with these folks I discovered that by and large, at least two thirds of the assembled got the "facts" informing their opinions from blogs, Jon Stewart's Daily Show and Michael Moore films. Personally, I found this to be appalling, yet not surprising.
People first received their info from a town crier, then newspapers and ultimately television, all of which were manipulated to one extent or another to convey a certain point of view. The arrival of the internet has done little, if anything to change these personal news gathering habits on the part of people interested enough in doing so. I was astounded to be at these functions mentioned above and hear people parroting what had been said in a film or tv show only the evening before. When I'd mention actual facts that I'd discovered not at a hastily written blog but at various government and watchdog-like websites (that many times contradicted what these folks were repeating), the look of disbelieving shock upon their faces was highly evident.
I do not fault people for how they go about getting their info, as it is to their credit that they make such an effort in the first place. I only wish that they would not settle for convenience, and would take the effort to dig a little bit deeper every so often.
Leading up to the 2004 election, I was part of a loose-knit group of folks that found themselves thinking in like manner about the state of the government. This ersatz think-tank was also a terrific reason to throw parties and BBQs on the weekends. Of the 35-40 of us involved in this activity, upon speaking with these folks I discovered that by and large, at least two thirds of the assembled got the "facts" informing their opinions from blogs, Jon Stewart's Daily Show and Michael Moore films. Personally, I found this to be appalling, yet not surprising.
People first received their info from a town crier, then newspapers and ultimately television, all of which were manipulated to one extent or another to convey a certain point of view. The arrival of the internet has done little, if anything to change these personal news gathering habits on the part of people interested enough in doing so. I was astounded to be at these functions mentioned above and hear people parroting what had been said in a film or tv show only the evening before. When I'd mention actual facts that I'd discovered not at a hastily written blog but at various government and watchdog-like websites (that many times contradicted what these folks were repeating), the look of disbelieving shock upon their faces was highly evident.
I do not fault people for how they go about getting their info, as it is to their credit that they make such an effort in the first place. I only wish that they would not settle for convenience, and would take the effort to dig a little bit deeper every so often.
Comment