The sun shines brightly on these late August days, but most of us still find ourselves behind the screen of a computer for a good chunk of the time. Perhaps, if you're fancy and Apple-oriented, you have an iPad. And that computer is your gateway to the rest of the world. Who among us opens the daily paper to receive the day's news when we have every paper of the day a button click away? And if you are, in fact, reading a physical paper (made of paper)-- are you doing so out of practicality, or out of a sense of nostalgia? Or out of an Amish-based reluctance to join the modern age? Or because you've calculated that opening your front door in a bath robe to collect the paper consumes fewer calories than finding your laptop charger?
It doesn't really matter. The facts are in, and they are indisputable: people en masse are getting their news from the Internet. And let's take a look a that news.
Three stories broke out in the past week. Three big, important stories. Stories that capture our emotions, stab deeply into our hearts and make us question how a benevolent God could allow this world to keep on spinning.
Story 1: Ben Affleck will be Playing Bruce Wayne in the next Batman/Superman film, Shocks the Nation
Whoa! Stop the presses, start the tweets. As a geek, I'm extremely interested in the Dark Knight's next move. What storylines will his exploits be based upon-- will we truly get an adaptation of the over-hyped but still legendary The Dark Knight Returns? Will there be elements of the Bruce Timm animated Universe, which also handled the rivalry? Will Ben Affleck redeem his comic book chops after the lukewarmly received Daredevil? Good heavens, how terrifying.
One of my favorite places on the Internet, gathered the "Best 50+ Tweets About Ben Affleck as Batman". Check it out, it's a solid list and almost entirely funny. But one joke missed my funny bone and hit me somewhere closer to the gut.
I won't send a link to it, but I can paraphrase: "I'm glad those Syrian children were gassed so they don't have to see Ben Affleck as Batman."
Yeah. More on that later. Moving on...
Story 2: Miley Cyrus Performs at the VMA, Shocks the Nation
Miley Cyrus! You were Hanna Montana. We had high hopes that you would elevate above culture and remain a positive role model for young girls! Now that you're discovering your sexuality and being used by a music industry that feigns sex on stage, we're so heartbroken! Wasn't Billy Ray Cyrus, accustomed to fame, supposed to guide you through stardom and help you lead a healthy life? And seriously, what's with the Teddy Bears? What's with the onesie that you strip out of? Does it represent your blossoming into womanhood, all on stage for us to see? I will say this: we all, as a society, want to collectively have sex with Robin Thicke, so that part we get.
Let's be real. The VMA is the venue where this happened:
Story 3: Syria Confirmed to Have Used Chemical Weapons on its citizens; Nation Remains Ambivalent
Let's ignore the fact that this should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention; preliminary evidence came in months ago and strongly suggested this conclusion. But now we have John Kerry, the Secretary of State, confirming it! President Obama himself said that the use of chemical weapons would be a "line in the sand" for intervention in what could otherwise be an internal affair for Syria. John McCain has been rattling this cage for a year, echoing similar arguments that were used before our entry to Iraq (and probably ignored for precisely that reason, legitimately or not). But the WMDs that we did not find in Iraq, we're saying they are definitely, DEFINITELY in Syria.
And that's the news.
Guess which stories got our attention? Guess which ones are "popular stories" trending on the sidebar of the Huffington Post? I invite you to look for yourself.
This, of course, begs the question: is that bad?
A few astute members of the Facebook community have commented: yes, obsessing over Miley Cyrus is nice, but really. Learn about the children that have been viciously murdered in Syria. Likewise, the joke about the Syrian children not "having to see" Ben Affleck play Batman, after offending a sufficient number of people, was rationalized as playing with the same theme: our misplaced priorities. I argued that the joke being on a list about Batman tweets diluted it's "message" or ability to shed light on the issue, and just came across as a Daniel Tosh joke in abhorrently poor taste. My analogy was to TMZ complaining about invasions of privacy during their show: irony abounds.
But that doesn't answer the question. Is it a legitimate critique on those who blithely live ignorant to the horrors of the world, and frenzy over the trivial horrors of entertainment and sport? Are those same critics of the VMA audience impervious to similar criticisms during the month of January, when the Super Bowl grabs them?
Read about Syria. It will make you a more informed person. But will anything change by reading it? What power does a citizen have to make substantial changes to our foreign policy? How much can we trust the United Nations or somebody else to fight this fight, weary of going to war with another clumsy "coalition of the willing"?
And what does that impotence say about our society? Does news consumption make us a more enlightened electorate? Does an enlightened electorate have more to say about how the world should function than the naive, the innocent, the men and women just trying to make it through another day of work and come home to their families?
Will power structures remain, regardless of our attention? Will "the powers that be" continue to simply pursue their interests as they will?
How much should we value the lives of Syrian children? How much of our day should those poor dead children interrupt, across a world of ocean and sand? A lot? A little? Some? Will it make a difference, to mourn them? Should we walk around miserable for the many injustices that this world produces? Or just slightly discontent, knowing that horror is only an airline flight away at any moment?
It's easy to sit in judgement of ignorance. But perhaps ignorance, as they say, is bliss. Ignorance... and pictures of cats. Maybe the Age of Information isn't all it's cracked up to be.
It doesn't really matter. The facts are in, and they are indisputable: people en masse are getting their news from the Internet. And let's take a look a that news.
Three stories broke out in the past week. Three big, important stories. Stories that capture our emotions, stab deeply into our hearts and make us question how a benevolent God could allow this world to keep on spinning.
Story 1: Ben Affleck will be Playing Bruce Wayne in the next Batman/Superman film, Shocks the Nation
Whoa! Stop the presses, start the tweets. As a geek, I'm extremely interested in the Dark Knight's next move. What storylines will his exploits be based upon-- will we truly get an adaptation of the over-hyped but still legendary The Dark Knight Returns? Will there be elements of the Bruce Timm animated Universe, which also handled the rivalry? Will Ben Affleck redeem his comic book chops after the lukewarmly received Daredevil? Good heavens, how terrifying.
One of my favorite places on the Internet, gathered the "Best 50+ Tweets About Ben Affleck as Batman". Check it out, it's a solid list and almost entirely funny. But one joke missed my funny bone and hit me somewhere closer to the gut.
I won't send a link to it, but I can paraphrase: "I'm glad those Syrian children were gassed so they don't have to see Ben Affleck as Batman."
Yeah. More on that later. Moving on...
Story 2: Miley Cyrus Performs at the VMA, Shocks the Nation
Let's be real. The VMA is the venue where this happened:
A monumental breakthrough for gay and lesbian acceptance? A challenge on our Puritanical sexual inhibitions?
No. Come on. It was a cheap gimmick of lipstick lesbianism, with all the profundity and cultural value of a Maxim magazine subscription insert.
Story 3: Syria Confirmed to Have Used Chemical Weapons on its citizens; Nation Remains Ambivalent
Let's ignore the fact that this should not come as a surprise to anyone who has been paying attention; preliminary evidence came in months ago and strongly suggested this conclusion. But now we have John Kerry, the Secretary of State, confirming it! President Obama himself said that the use of chemical weapons would be a "line in the sand" for intervention in what could otherwise be an internal affair for Syria. John McCain has been rattling this cage for a year, echoing similar arguments that were used before our entry to Iraq (and probably ignored for precisely that reason, legitimately or not). But the WMDs that we did not find in Iraq, we're saying they are definitely, DEFINITELY in Syria.
Is Bashar al-Assad, this geeky, whitish character with a meek mustache, really a Middle Eastern villain on the scale of Hussein? Yes, he really is.
Guess which stories got our attention? Guess which ones are "popular stories" trending on the sidebar of the Huffington Post? I invite you to look for yourself.
This, of course, begs the question: is that bad?
A few astute members of the Facebook community have commented: yes, obsessing over Miley Cyrus is nice, but really. Learn about the children that have been viciously murdered in Syria. Likewise, the joke about the Syrian children not "having to see" Ben Affleck play Batman, after offending a sufficient number of people, was rationalized as playing with the same theme: our misplaced priorities. I argued that the joke being on a list about Batman tweets diluted it's "message" or ability to shed light on the issue, and just came across as a Daniel Tosh joke in abhorrently poor taste. My analogy was to TMZ complaining about invasions of privacy during their show: irony abounds.
But that doesn't answer the question. Is it a legitimate critique on those who blithely live ignorant to the horrors of the world, and frenzy over the trivial horrors of entertainment and sport? Are those same critics of the VMA audience impervious to similar criticisms during the month of January, when the Super Bowl grabs them?
Read about Syria. It will make you a more informed person. But will anything change by reading it? What power does a citizen have to make substantial changes to our foreign policy? How much can we trust the United Nations or somebody else to fight this fight, weary of going to war with another clumsy "coalition of the willing"?
And what does that impotence say about our society? Does news consumption make us a more enlightened electorate? Does an enlightened electorate have more to say about how the world should function than the naive, the innocent, the men and women just trying to make it through another day of work and come home to their families?
Will power structures remain, regardless of our attention? Will "the powers that be" continue to simply pursue their interests as they will?
How much should we value the lives of Syrian children? How much of our day should those poor dead children interrupt, across a world of ocean and sand? A lot? A little? Some? Will it make a difference, to mourn them? Should we walk around miserable for the many injustices that this world produces? Or just slightly discontent, knowing that horror is only an airline flight away at any moment?
It's easy to sit in judgement of ignorance. But perhaps ignorance, as they say, is bliss. Ignorance... and pictures of cats. Maybe the Age of Information isn't all it's cracked up to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment