no news today
… nor tomorrow.
Why is it that all news outlets spit out and repeat the same nothingness day in and day out, with only minor variations in the pretty woolly comments they wrap everything in in their feeble attempts to make what is essentially worth nothing, appear like something worth paying attention to?
Most of today's “news” seems to fall under the following nonsensical variants…
“Be afraid, be very afraid.”
“Everything is twice as bad everywhere as everywhere else.”
“We have no idea, but we insist on telling you what to think.” … with zero qualifications for how and why anything is, or can be, what they tell us. God have mercy…
So, am I the only one who feels that what passes most of the world's newsdesks these days, seems to have been tailored for our trashcans rather than our screens, speakers, and in print? That hardly any of what is called “news” is worth turning on TVs, laptops, cellphones and radios for, and most definitely not worth buying or opening online or offline newspapers for?
Was it any better in days past? Not really … at least not as far back as I can remember. But, back then we knew that (at least) ninety percent of everything was crap, and simply ignored the nonsense without mentioning it.
These days the most crappy ways to sort and serve news are pretty much obligatory – as “required by law” – across the board, and near impossible to avoid since most of the more trustworthy alternatives we had back in time are either prevented from getting through to us, or, they may have chosen to drop to the same low levels as the majority in order to survive, and have thereby made themselves equally irrelevant.
distract and diverge
“When big names talk, they talk to _(insert news outlet(s) here)_”, and beyond varying amounts of hot air one can not expect much regardless of names (and head-sizes), and chosen “news” outlet(s). They are just perfect examples of how to wrap loads of crappy nothingness and lies in even more of the same crappy nothingness and lies, in order to confuse and distract the masses.
The idea is to distract people with whatever is at hand, and diverge their attention from what matters in their lives, into
blind support of what matters to the self-appointed leaders in our societies.
This is easier to achieve than it sounds, as anything and everything can be used to distract when all the good and more real alternatives are being blocked. All one needs is a little imagination, and the ability to gather enough loyal, or just plain stupid, followers to create the illusions of trends.
Trends are powerful tools for controlling masses, regardless of how stupid those trends may be.
Once people with little to no understanding of and interest in relevant subjects, start gathering in masses
to defend their right to stay ignorant, the bases for self-perpetuating political and quasi-religious movements
craving dominant leaders rather than knowledge, are created.
Aspiring leaders depend on such movements of devoted, obedient and preferably totally ignorant people, in order to fulfill their plans of diverging from present courses onto (for them) more suitable and profitable ones.
History has more than enough examples of how important it is for despots to dumb down news and information to
levels of the lowest common denominators, in order to build and keep their bases of followers at those
Despots don't want intelligent and knowledgeable followers, as they won't follow for very long.
It is especially important to reach and convert those who most easily come to rely entirely on faith and trust in idols and trend setters, rather than facts about subjects. Such people are the easiest to manipulate into doing all the dirty work, and to spread “the one true gospel” (whatever it may be) without asking troublesome questions related to reality.
when big names talk…
… listen carefully to what they do not talk about, as what really matters is guaranteed to be found somewhere in between those spoken words. It always was, and always will be that way.
No trust in fellow humans? Sure I have, but for “big names” only when presented with verifiable data rooted in reality
to back up what they talk about and stand for. Not to forget how strong proofs that are needed to assure me that what they keep silent about
won't be used to hurt us.
All to avoid being pulled in by unrealistic beliefs in sweet and/or bombastic lines of meaningless words and phrases.
That most of what “big names” talk about isn't worth listening to, is one thing. However, if one chooses to
listen anyway, then one must listen carefully and track every nuance, as otherwise too many of their lies, and what they leave
out, may pass unnoticed.
This is where most mistakes are made by the audience, in that most people end up reacting to what they thought was being said, rather than to what was actually being said. Not very smart, IMO.
Reacting too quickly to news is in itself most often not a good idea either, as it is too easy to get it all wrong regardless
of the quality of the news and our understanding of it.
Taking the time to reflect on what is brought to our attention, and to compare it to other sources before deciding if any of it is worth reacting to and if so in what way, is nearly always the better way to collect and process news.
All that, while making up ones mind whether to pay attention to any of it – “big names” and all, or to turn off and
get rid of all official news gathering objects in our possession, including the mail-box.
last rev: 22.sep.2023