The melodramatic temper tantrums coming from journalists over their demise can get very annoying, especially as they seem to do a lot of whining about their fall from grace these days. They keep trying to manipulate people and tell them what to think, and it's not happening.
And they do not know why because they do not know their place in society.
The ones in journalism proper have no clue, and neither do those scribbling their arrogant and oblivious nonsense in university newspapers, either.
When you are sheltered and wear blinders, your sense of reality becomes skewed to the point of ridiculousness.
The Medium is a newspaper for the University of Toronto, and there is one particularly goofy and griping article that shows how little an academic institution understands reality.
The obnoxious drivel has a very chilling headline:
Restoring the Integrity of Journalism
The Internet has killed critical thinking.
Such manipulative drama that has not one ounce of truth -- or critical thinking going for it.
Journalism doesn't have integrity because all they are trying to do is tell people how to think. They skewed war coverage, relying on public relations firms. The presented swindlers as Titans of Industry. They did a lot of damage to the world because they were never empirical.
They should present facts, not narratives because people have different life requirements, and giving facts allows people to use those facts the way they want and need.
But the article makes one very ignorant assumption: that the Big Scam Internet killed critical thinking.
No, it didn't.
What the Internet did was force those arrogant meddlers who always wore blinders to see that not everyone used the same logic because people have different realities.
The man who had to drop out of high school to work in a factory to support his family has a different reality than the sheltered rich kid whose mommy and daddy pull favours to get that kid a degree and a job.
They have different logic. What works for one person doesn't work for the other. They may not be fluent in each other's logic, but do not assume that just because someone uses different logic that they are stupid and inferior to you.
Once upon a time, only certain sanctioned logic was broadcast and published, but the Internet broke down those fortresses and gates, and now the old guard has been sulking and plotting ever since.
Get over yourselves, children, and let's see some of that tolerance of diversity you talk so much about.
And "restoring" integrity of journalism is not going to force the little people into going back to handing their free will over to you.
They always thought that way, but for the past twenty years, you finally got exposed to their innermost thoughts.
And they are not wrong to think it.
But the Washington Post also cannot deal with reality. They are now talking about a "crisis in journalism" -- the popular buzz phrase being strategically used right now, even though journalism is way beyond crisis: it is dead -- and how it is bringing a "crisis" in democracy.
No, it's not. What you see because the gates have been destroyed. What you are seeing is the liberation of thought. Journalism became a way of social engineering; issuing directives instead of giving facts.
The Internet is a window to the world of opinion: it shows us that beliefs are not confined to some binary and sanitized checklist.
That has been the hardest reality for journalism to ever grasp. They keep trying to go back to a time where they had control of the communications tools.
It's not that world anymore. It is a different one, and it is not going to change just to make journalists feel powerful again. Instead of lamenting about how the world used a platform to speak out, regardless of their realities, backgrounds, confinements, and flawed natures, journalists should have found a new purpose within that changing world.
They didn't, and the destruction they are now experiencing is entirely their own and of their own making...