TIGHT ROPE WALK
The current sweep of criticism which is giving the new media a rather close look is, not doubt, a good thing in that it seeks to protect the validity of the news we are reading, hearing and seeing.
New charges of intentional malpractice are being launched every day, it seems, and our rights and our responsibilities concerning this vital part of our cultural situation is being examined. The examination comes close to being inquisitional in nature far too often and that is a point we must watch with special care and apply common sense elements and sound reasoning to such tests concerning validity lest we lead the parade to our own ruin.
We are walking a tight rope over a chasm of unknown depth and content. If we, in checking out the overall rig, loosen the right bindings too much or those pinning it to the left phylum are tweaked too avidly, it may become increasingly more and more and more difficult to balance upon it. The rope must be rigid but, at the same time, have a degree of flexibility which can absorb tensions exerted against it's firmness.
Are you disturbed by the current actions of what we loosely call ?the media? Obviously, some people are very much much aroused because criticism continues and mounts in intensity with almost any news event of consequence. Are you confident concerning the truth of the?news? reports which come into your life? Do you feel the facts are honestly sought, arrived at and presented? Do you agree with those who insist the much of the news is being consistently ?slanted? by large sections of the communications elements of the media to suit their political or social preferences? Doubters are in a growth phase.
Few American, however, can define what they mean by ?news?. How does legitimate news differ from purposely patterned propaganda? How accurate are the news reports that come to you in your particular location? Have you every felt you have been duped, fooled, ignored or wrongly informed? Just last week a leading daily newspaper in New York City headlined the supposed fact that Richard Gephardt, of Missouri, had been chosen as John Kerry's running. It was explained away that the story was based on an overhead phone call to Gephart from Kerry at one-thirty or so in the morning -just before press time. How much of the news we are fed is based on such in-depth effort?
This, too, shall pass. The best thing to try to do is to keep your own nose and noggin clean. Read carefully and be careful what you choose to read. All that is printed is not true; all that is said is not true,nor is all that you see faultlessly factual at all times. And, don't get all up-tight and bent out of your obese shape when others disagree with you.
Lighten up a bit, too. Think of it this way: When Old Noah was building his gigantic ark he hired thousands of workers who had not the slightest idea that an all-consuming flood was imminent. They did good work anyway.
A.L.M. July 7, 2004 [c525wds]
