0 comment Saturday, June 14, 2014 | admin
Does Web really connect us?
I wonder if 'journalists' write articles like the linked article spontaneously, or whether they are told what to write and how to write it? It's just amazing how so many articles can be 'written' across America containing so little 'diversity', in the sense of original thinking and unique points of view.
There are no such ideas in the controlled media; the SPJ and the ASNE have their little 'diversity mandates' and guidelines and the newspapers and other media, controlled by ideologues who share the same narrow, blinkered world view with their underling 'journalists', crank out identical articles all over the country every day. Amazing how alike they all are, is it not? We live in a world in which, as Star Trek told us decades ago, there is 'infinite diversity in infinite combinations.' Funny, then, how all these articles are the same, with a few different names and places. Same ideas repeated ad infinitum, all with the one basic message.
Mr. Watson has given us a new term, though --- or new to me, at least: 'digital segregation.' Heretofore we've just heard about ordinary segregation, that bad old practice from the bad old days. You know, where people congregate, like birds of a feather, with those like themselves. But now, just as with these newly-discovered forms of 'racism' (you got your regular racism, your institutional racism, unconscious racism, subconscious racism, scientific racism, and no doubt many other varieties as yet unnamed). But the digital age has given birth to a new form of evil, apparently, in which we seek out others of like minds online. How diabolical! But it's what we can expect from racist Whitey, who no doubt lies awake at night devising new forms of evil to deny others their rights.
Mr. Watson in his article uses the well-worn phrase 'experts say...' to lead up to the key lines here, which no doubt will bemoan the lack of 'diversity.'
A Mr. Zuckerman of Harvard speaking at a conference tells us that we have to 'widen the world' via the web -- and I suspect the Big Brother government will be doing the widening for us, and telling us just who we ought to be 'interacting' with so as to acquire the proper 'global outlook.'
Big Brother, of course, acts in concert with their media arm, which we call 'mainstream' for some reason.
We are told that we have to globalize our thinking in order to succeed in this 'global' economy. This is not self-evident; why or how would interacting with 'diversity' online make my life better, or make the world work better? I think the idea is the Powers That Be want to leave no place where White Americans, or Europeans or Australians can interact with their fellows; oh no, we might be up to no good if we communicate with our brethren.
No amount of 'chatting' with somebody in China or Latin America or the Middle East will make me a 'global citizen', and truth be told, the people in those countries will not give up their own ethnocentrism and preference for their own. I don't imagine their countries are encouraging them to associate with White Americans online for their own good, or for the good of the 'global village' or anything else. No, as usual, it's only we who are the problem.
Just as with the flagrant attempt to overwhelm our countries via immigration, the effort is now turning to the Web where the idea is to perhaps change our thinking and water down our culture by introducing disparate, conflicting elements. They will try to jam our signals and stop our communication with people like ourselves. We are to be isolated within 'diversity'.
John Donne famously wrote that 'no man is an island', but if the people in charge have their way, every one of us will be an island, surrounded by 'diversity' but unable to connect with our own. Eventually, we are supposed to be absorbed, and gentically overwhelmed.
And of course if any of us says this, it's a sign of paranoia. So the 'experts' say.
The ''experts'' and the meddling journalists and government apparatchiks should learn that it is none of their business who any of us choose to associate with, online or in 'real life.' They exert influence far beyond both their knowledge and their position, in telling the rest of us what to do.
H/T AmRen for the link to this article.
I wonder if 'journalists' write articles like the linked article spontaneously, or whether they are told what to write and how to write it? It's just amazing how so many articles can be 'written' across America containing so little 'diversity', in the sense of original thinking and unique points of view.
There are no such ideas in the controlled media; the SPJ and the ASNE have their little 'diversity mandates' and guidelines and the newspapers and other media, controlled by ideologues who share the same narrow, blinkered world view with their underling 'journalists', crank out identical articles all over the country every day. Amazing how alike they all are, is it not? We live in a world in which, as Star Trek told us decades ago, there is 'infinite diversity in infinite combinations.' Funny, then, how all these articles are the same, with a few different names and places. Same ideas repeated ad infinitum, all with the one basic message.
Mr. Watson has given us a new term, though --- or new to me, at least: 'digital segregation.' Heretofore we've just heard about ordinary segregation, that bad old practice from the bad old days. You know, where people congregate, like birds of a feather, with those like themselves. But now, just as with these newly-discovered forms of 'racism' (you got your regular racism, your institutional racism, unconscious racism, subconscious racism, scientific racism, and no doubt many other varieties as yet unnamed). But the digital age has given birth to a new form of evil, apparently, in which we seek out others of like minds online. How diabolical! But it's what we can expect from racist Whitey, who no doubt lies awake at night devising new forms of evil to deny others their rights.
Mr. Watson in his article uses the well-worn phrase 'experts say...' to lead up to the key lines here, which no doubt will bemoan the lack of 'diversity.'
A Mr. Zuckerman of Harvard speaking at a conference tells us that we have to 'widen the world' via the web -- and I suspect the Big Brother government will be doing the widening for us, and telling us just who we ought to be 'interacting' with so as to acquire the proper 'global outlook.'
Big Brother, of course, acts in concert with their media arm, which we call 'mainstream' for some reason.
We are told that we have to globalize our thinking in order to succeed in this 'global' economy. This is not self-evident; why or how would interacting with 'diversity' online make my life better, or make the world work better? I think the idea is the Powers That Be want to leave no place where White Americans, or Europeans or Australians can interact with their fellows; oh no, we might be up to no good if we communicate with our brethren.
No amount of 'chatting' with somebody in China or Latin America or the Middle East will make me a 'global citizen', and truth be told, the people in those countries will not give up their own ethnocentrism and preference for their own. I don't imagine their countries are encouraging them to associate with White Americans online for their own good, or for the good of the 'global village' or anything else. No, as usual, it's only we who are the problem.
Just as with the flagrant attempt to overwhelm our countries via immigration, the effort is now turning to the Web where the idea is to perhaps change our thinking and water down our culture by introducing disparate, conflicting elements. They will try to jam our signals and stop our communication with people like ourselves. We are to be isolated within 'diversity'.
John Donne famously wrote that 'no man is an island', but if the people in charge have their way, every one of us will be an island, surrounded by 'diversity' but unable to connect with our own. Eventually, we are supposed to be absorbed, and gentically overwhelmed.
And of course if any of us says this, it's a sign of paranoia. So the 'experts' say.
The ''experts'' and the meddling journalists and government apparatchiks should learn that it is none of their business who any of us choose to associate with, online or in 'real life.' They exert influence far beyond both their knowledge and their position, in telling the rest of us what to do.
H/T AmRen for the link to this article.
Labels: Celebrate, Digital Diversity