If you have any sense of history (and that commodity is becoming rarer as fantasy takes its place), you’ll know how difficult it was for most human generations to acquire knowledge.
For millennia personal observation and hearsay were all we had. Then writing was invented, but books were staggeringly expensive until printing came along, and even then, only the smallest part of the literate population could afford them. Just a few generations ago, mass printing kicked in, then electronic media. Now we have instant access to unimaginable and inexhaustible sources of information, sources that are mushrooming daily.
Once upon a time, humans had to glean our knowledge from as many (or as few) sources as we could lay our hands on. We depended entirely on what we could find from our own books (if we were lucky enough to own any) or those we borrowed from our friends or stole from some hapless monastic library. We weren’t well placed for critical analysis, and alternative explanations weren’t available, so we were inclined to accept fantastic tales and myths as if they were literally true.
Sifting Knowledge to Find Truth
Have the wonders of this Information Age changed all that? Up to a point, certainly—though our brain capacity remains pretty much as it has been since people first walked the earth.Accessing and processing the wealth of data now available presents problems that our ancestors never dreamed of. Everything now depends on the use we make of our vast and growing libraries and that virtual infinitude of knowledge floating in cyberspace, and—here’s the crunch—on the honesty and veracity of those who post or publish the information. Knowing who to trust is at least as difficult for the conscientious seeker after knowledge today as it was 500 or 1,000 years ago.
Those who rely on the TV news as the sole source of their understanding of current events place themselves in the same position as the meanest medieval carl. Everything you see on TV has been distilled and selected from the totality of human happenings based on principles of choice that may be obscure.
For North Koreans, those driving principles are no doubt hidden, but they are obvious to us, for we understand the nature of dictatorships. We know that such regimes will always censor, distort, manufacture or exaggerate “facts” to promote the party line. Lying to them is not a sin but a necessity—and, therefore, a virtue.
How fortunate we are to live in the freedom-loving West! We are indeed fortunate in so many ways; let’s gratefully concede that point. But we do have a problem, and it’s a big one. The mass media in general, and TV in particular, select the news they want us to have and sit on the rest. Their basis of selection varies, but in general, we can be certain that sensationalism tops the list.
Frenzy for Sensationalism
A calamity in Australia or certain other English-speaking countries will attract more notice than a similar or even more serious event in India, Africa, or South America. The murder of 10 people in a group is bigger news than the murder of 10 (or 20, or 100) people singly—massacres always make better news than individual killings. Other deaths, in general, will not be reported at all unless they are related to COVID or some other riveting cause.The search for sensation usually looks for somebody to blame, too. Castigating those allegedly responsible, especially if they belong to an unpopular minority, is always a good sport.
But there is another basis for selecting news that’s more dire than mere sensationalism. The feeding of our lust for sensation may be an unworthy goal, yet at least it provides entertainment. But the deliberate suppression of unpopular opinions and uncomfortable truths endangers civilization itself. You don’t have to search hard to find evidence of it.
Those who question the standard woke narrative on human-induced climate change, gender fluidity, the endemic racism of western nations, or the proper treatment of COVID receive precious little attention from the mass media unless it is to mock or denigrate their views. The biggest current issue is the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on abortion, which is almost always presented as an outrage against women’s rights and almost never (except in parody) as the defence of the defenceless.
Choose Solid Argument Over Sensationalism
Some wit once defined a pessimist as “an optimist with the facts.” Much as I enjoy that clever and pithy remark, I think it discloses a seriously dangerous caste of mind, a proneness to see and approve only the worst. It reminds me of that other old one about two men lying in a ditch; one sees only mud, and the other looks up at the stars.Only a man harrowing clods In a slow silent walk With an old horse that stumbles and nods Half asleep as they stalk.
Only thin smoke without flame From the heaps of couch-grass; Yet this will go onward the same Though Dynasties pass.
So give up on the TV news. You won’t learn anything you need to know about the world around you, nothing to make you wiser, very little to make you kinder to people who aren’t on your wavelength. Read good journals like The Epoch Times instead and prefer solid argument to sensation!
