The most satisfying of emotions is to experience a combination of outrage and self-righteousness. They go hand in hand. I know a hard left friend who spends her days finding and posting news items (typically originating in the Occupy Wall Street-type borg) and expressing her horror and outrage at all of them. Alligator Alcatraz! the Gestapo that is ICE! Untold millions dying in Africa because GS-14s at USAID were sent home! Girls all but murdered in Texas because the supervillain Trump and his henchman Elon did something something at NOAA. It's a target rich environment for outrage these days, and the likes of Heather Cox Richardson is like some sort of AI designed to spot targets for you. I'm sure when she lays down her keyboard at the end of the day, she feels like she's slowed down the fascist machine just a bit!
People believe what they want to believe. Read Othello or King Lear. Many movies, novels, etc are built around the premiss of people believing things that aren't true. Nothing new.
Oh yes. In the Cancelling of the American mind the authors collect a bunch of surveys and whatnot from academics. It's chilling how open they are about discriminating against those who don't toe the line politically. These are people who are "supposedly" devoted to truth seeking.
People like to bring up A.I., but I'm old enough to remember when it happened to Sarah Palin. A lot of people were convinced she said "I can see Russia from my house." when she never did - it was a parody imitator of her.
Yes, I remember the Palin thing! I think the SNL parody made it "real." Reminds me that, just the other day, I heard Bill Maher rip Marie Antoinette for saying "let them eat cake," which she of course never really said
Yes, definitely! Just watched it. Very interesting and dispiriting, but I agree with him. Cool to see him use the historian's method on the topic. And Lucas forgetting the Star Wars premiere is wild.
Interesting article but I don't understand your use of "monoculture," which is most often used to refer to the past, when everyone was experiencing the same cultural moments at the same time. Now, everyone has narrowly defined interests and identities and Mr. Beast has to be told who Prince was. The monoculture was shattered by the internet.
Thanks and that's funny about Mr. Beast. Hadn't heard that. I use "monoculture" to refer to the intellectual conformity that pervades entertainment, media, academia and other culture-producing institutions. So Mr. Beast might not know who Prince is, but I bet he knows the "correct" and "incorrect" opinions regarding any number of consequential subjects.
That makes sense. Marxists call that ideology, the false consciousness a person has to develop in order to justify their place in an unjust society. There's nothing I love more than reading critiques of ideology, or monoculture as the case may be. You'll never run out of material, that's for sure.
If you're a filmmaker you should be aptly aware of the Kuleshov effect. Which I've been on about for awhile is one of the chief tools in the media's box for "lying."
For those who don't know (but of course Ted does) - you use the human tendency to connect sequential images to convey a message without using explicit words.
To use an over top example, I might write a headline like, "Woman killed on street juggler frequents."
Now on a technical level, I have not lied at all. I've merely stated two facts. A woman was killed on a street. A juggler frequents that street when plying his craft.
But humans will tend to believe that it can't be for no reason I stated those two facts. So the reader will naturally believe that the juggler must have killed the woman on that street. Why else would I bring him up? Even if when you dig into the details you find out the juggler wasn't even on that street the whole day. You probably won't notice those details or only learn about them once the connection has solidified in your mind.
Once you recognize this patter, you'll see it EVERYWHERE. The media will bring up things together without outright saying that they are related, but knowing that you will make that assumption and connection for them. Then if you ever want to yell at them about it, they can point out they never said anything untruthful... (they just edited it to get you to the conclusion they want)
And of course you can't talk about editing without pointing out what the news media does NOT report on will often be ten times more influential than what they do report on.
Very interesting example, and I confess to being at the "seeing it everywhere stage," as I'm sure you are too. And your point about what's not being covered reminds me of Bastiat on seen vs. unseen. I think it helps explain so much, including, of all things cancel culture and related madness.
I always appreciate seeing articles like this from you, Ted. Around me, currently, it can easily feel like the world is ending given how stressed people are based on the news.
I once saw an ad for an LGBT+ charity trying to hook me in with a statistic along the lines of, "30(?) trans people were killed this year." I don't recall the exact numbers or tagline, just that seemed far too low to be attention grabbing. Perhaps the statistic shows disproportionally high murder rates, or refered to a single town, but they didn't even try to make it look compelling. My initial read was that it was a national statistic. Even if it were for a particular state, I did the research, and...
Yeaaaaahhhh 30-something is like, a slim percentage of how many people are murdered in general. Per month.
Of course, like you said, we'd all want that number to be 0. Still, its important to put into perspective how common things are is overall.
Yes. Many do. It's the media’s fault. Race porn. I did a deep dive on the data.
Cool. I look forward to checking it out.
The most satisfying of emotions is to experience a combination of outrage and self-righteousness. They go hand in hand. I know a hard left friend who spends her days finding and posting news items (typically originating in the Occupy Wall Street-type borg) and expressing her horror and outrage at all of them. Alligator Alcatraz! the Gestapo that is ICE! Untold millions dying in Africa because GS-14s at USAID were sent home! Girls all but murdered in Texas because the supervillain Trump and his henchman Elon did something something at NOAA. It's a target rich environment for outrage these days, and the likes of Heather Cox Richardson is like some sort of AI designed to spot targets for you. I'm sure when she lays down her keyboard at the end of the day, she feels like she's slowed down the fascist machine just a bit!
Well said. And they're so selectively compassionate. Their hearts overflow for victims, but only if they're being oppressed by the "correct" villains!
People believe what they want to believe. Read Othello or King Lear. Many movies, novels, etc are built around the premiss of people believing things that aren't true. Nothing new.
Yup. Good point. Sad but true. Other institutions like academia and the media are supposedly devoted to truth.
key word is "supposedly" Mostly they are devoted to advancing their agenda, whatever that may be at that time.
Oh yes. In the Cancelling of the American mind the authors collect a bunch of surveys and whatnot from academics. It's chilling how open they are about discriminating against those who don't toe the line politically. These are people who are "supposedly" devoted to truth seeking.
People like to bring up A.I., but I'm old enough to remember when it happened to Sarah Palin. A lot of people were convinced she said "I can see Russia from my house." when she never did - it was a parody imitator of her.
(see also: https://youtu.be/4A7Leaq1R-s?si=09F7HXYJcyE-cG8x )
Yes, I remember the Palin thing! I think the SNL parody made it "real." Reminds me that, just the other day, I heard Bill Maher rip Marie Antoinette for saying "let them eat cake," which she of course never really said
Yeah I think the video link I dropped will especially speak to you. (it’s only 10 min)
Yes, definitely! Just watched it. Very interesting and dispiriting, but I agree with him. Cool to see him use the historian's method on the topic. And Lucas forgetting the Star Wars premiere is wild.
Interesting article but I don't understand your use of "monoculture," which is most often used to refer to the past, when everyone was experiencing the same cultural moments at the same time. Now, everyone has narrowly defined interests and identities and Mr. Beast has to be told who Prince was. The monoculture was shattered by the internet.
Thanks and that's funny about Mr. Beast. Hadn't heard that. I use "monoculture" to refer to the intellectual conformity that pervades entertainment, media, academia and other culture-producing institutions. So Mr. Beast might not know who Prince is, but I bet he knows the "correct" and "incorrect" opinions regarding any number of consequential subjects.
That makes sense. Marxists call that ideology, the false consciousness a person has to develop in order to justify their place in an unjust society. There's nothing I love more than reading critiques of ideology, or monoculture as the case may be. You'll never run out of material, that's for sure.
If you're a filmmaker you should be aptly aware of the Kuleshov effect. Which I've been on about for awhile is one of the chief tools in the media's box for "lying."
For those who don't know (but of course Ted does) - you use the human tendency to connect sequential images to convey a message without using explicit words.
To use an over top example, I might write a headline like, "Woman killed on street juggler frequents."
Now on a technical level, I have not lied at all. I've merely stated two facts. A woman was killed on a street. A juggler frequents that street when plying his craft.
But humans will tend to believe that it can't be for no reason I stated those two facts. So the reader will naturally believe that the juggler must have killed the woman on that street. Why else would I bring him up? Even if when you dig into the details you find out the juggler wasn't even on that street the whole day. You probably won't notice those details or only learn about them once the connection has solidified in your mind.
Once you recognize this patter, you'll see it EVERYWHERE. The media will bring up things together without outright saying that they are related, but knowing that you will make that assumption and connection for them. Then if you ever want to yell at them about it, they can point out they never said anything untruthful... (they just edited it to get you to the conclusion they want)
And of course you can't talk about editing without pointing out what the news media does NOT report on will often be ten times more influential than what they do report on.
Very interesting example, and I confess to being at the "seeing it everywhere stage," as I'm sure you are too. And your point about what's not being covered reminds me of Bastiat on seen vs. unseen. I think it helps explain so much, including, of all things cancel culture and related madness.
I always appreciate seeing articles like this from you, Ted. Around me, currently, it can easily feel like the world is ending given how stressed people are based on the news.
I once saw an ad for an LGBT+ charity trying to hook me in with a statistic along the lines of, "30(?) trans people were killed this year." I don't recall the exact numbers or tagline, just that seemed far too low to be attention grabbing. Perhaps the statistic shows disproportionally high murder rates, or refered to a single town, but they didn't even try to make it look compelling. My initial read was that it was a national statistic. Even if it were for a particular state, I did the research, and...
Yeaaaaahhhh 30-something is like, a slim percentage of how many people are murdered in general. Per month.
Of course, like you said, we'd all want that number to be 0. Still, its important to put into perspective how common things are is overall.
Interesting. And good for you for digging into the issue a bit. I've had some similar experiences with statistics used by activists.