zoobyshoe
- 6,506
- 1,254
I don't sweat elections much. I vote by party.Ivan Seeking said:What about before something important happens? Do you vote retroactively?
The discussion revolves around the perceived chaos and unreliability of information on the internet, particularly in relation to news reporting and the propagation of sensationalism. Participants explore the implications of immediate access to information and the challenges it presents in discerning truth from misinformation. The conversation touches on historical perspectives and generational concerns regarding media consumption.
Participants generally express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the impact of the internet on information reliability. While some acknowledge the historical continuity of sensationalism, others emphasize the unique challenges posed by the internet's rapid information flow. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views on the implications of these dynamics.
Participants reference historical media consumption patterns and the evolution of information dissemination, indicating that assumptions about the internet's impact may depend on individual perspectives and experiences. There is a noted lack of consensus on whether the current state of information is worse than in the past.
I don't sweat elections much. I vote by party.Ivan Seeking said:What about before something important happens? Do you vote retroactively?
phyzguy said:It seems to me that, in addition to the things mentioned here, the internet (and the large number of cable TV stations) is also contributing to the very polarized attitudes we have now, at least in the US. I think that before having access to all of these sites, people would read a few newspapers or watch a few television stations for their news reports. These gave a relatively balanced approach to the news. Now, people seem to only get information from the sites that agree with them, and are only rarely exposed to an alternate viewpoint. In the past, I don't think political opinions were so highly polarized as they are today, and this may be the reason. Does anyone else feel this way?
Glad to hear that. Usually it's pourn that gets intro'd. Poor children, oversexed and underphuqed. Non sequiter you might say, but it is true.Proton Soup said:internet was my intro to Chomsky.
Dawkins has good reason to be angry.don't know Dennett. think Dawkins is little more than an evangelical.