Without the web, the handful of media conglomerations that have swallowed up all of the major TV, radio, and print outlets, could promulgate misinformation with little or no hope of correction. In the pre-Internet age, proponents of unpopular or "fringe" thought systems were almost exclusively relegated to public access television and short-wave radio. Today, anyone with a web-cam and an opinion can freely broadcast his views around the globe, with a nearly unlimited potential audience
The Internet is no exception. Our ugliness, weakness, ignorance and debasement burst forth coincident with our beauty, intelligence, power and grace.
The Internet is no exception. Our ugliness, weakness, ignorance and debasement burst forth coincident with our beauty, intelligence, power and grace.
1) I'm not sure I understand the question, or rather, I don't know why you're asking it.
In virtually every popular treatment I've ever seen, 'contemporary history' refers to recent events generally occurring after WWII (someone else who responded to this article in another forum tried to make an issue out of the same point -- is it really that hard to just Google the words "contemporary history"?
Michael Goodspeed wrote:Plasmatic wrote: "I'm confused as to what the asserted cause of this crisis in communication is. Specifically what is the 'intrinsic' flaw man is supposed to have in his nature that causes this 'coincident' 'ugliness', and how is the internet a part of this cause?"
1) I'm not sure I understand the question, or rather, I don't know why you're asking it. I've never met a human being who wasn't flawed, and whose flaws didn't occasionally manifest in his or her communications. It's as simple as that. Maybe you choose not to view these flaws as "intrinsic"; many others do. And I never said that the Internet has directly caused anything; but I do believe that the predominance of electronic communications has only increased the atomization of our culture -- I don't see an abundance of meaningful human connections happening in cyberspace. I see people becoming more isolated and lonely in our culture, and many studies confirm this. From http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14126192/
"In June, an authoritative study in the American Sociological Review found that the average American had only two close friends in whom they would confide on important matters, down from an average of three in 1985. The number of people who said they had no such confidant soared from 10 percent in 1985 to nearly 25 percent in 2004; an additional 19 percent said they had only one confidant — often their spouse."
Plasmatic wrote: "Also 'contemporary history' compared to when? Has their [sic] ever been more people who can read and write in history?"
In virtually every popular treatment I've ever seen, 'contemporary history' refers to recent events generally occurring after WWII (someone else who responded to this article in another forum tried to make an issue out of the same point -- is it really that hard to just Google the words "contemporary history"? Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_history). You ask, "Has their [sic] ever been more people who can read and write in history?" My response is, if you are talking about the sheer percentage of human beings on the planet who have acquired the minimal literacy skills required to function in the world, probably not. Of course, many third world nations whose populaces had previously been deprived of even minimal educational resources have experienced vast improvements in both living conditions and educational opportunities. But certainly in the U.S., I cannot imagine anyone disputing that overall, we are far below where we were 40 or 50 years ago. (Just one mind-numbing study illustrating this: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/30/education/30sat.html)
And from
http://www.nea.gov/news/news04/ReadingAtRisk.Html
Fewer Than Half of American Adults Now Read Literature
July 8, 2004
Contact:
Garrick Davis
202-682-5570
New York, N.Y. - Literary reading is in dramatic decline with fewer than half of American adults now reading literature, according to a National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) survey released today. Reading at Risk: A Survey of Literary Reading in America reports drops in all groups studied, with the steepest rate of decline - 28 percent - occurring in the youngest age groups.
The study also documents an overall decline of 10 percentage points in literary readers from 1982 to 2002, representing a loss of 20 million potential readers. The rate of decline is increasing and, according to the survey, has nearly tripled in the last decade. The findings were announced today by NEA Chairman Dana Gioia during a news conference at the New York Public Library.
Incidentally, this is my first and last response. Others are of course free to pick up the gambit and take the debate wherever they wish.
Return to Thunderblogs/Multimedia
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest