The Information Age

(Traditional format)

Sat Jan 1 08:29:48 2005 The Information Age
Posted by Tony Lawrence
Search Keys: browsing
Referencing: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/12/30/142458/25

The Kuro5hin article referenced above specifically talks about Wikipedia, but the value of the Internet as an information source has been questioned before: bloggers vs. traditional news sources, Google vs. a librarian, etc.

In the Wikipedia case, the author makes the case for "experts". I'm certainly not against experts, or "showing respect" for same (as the reference article suggests), but I would like to point out that it is "experts" who are always the biggest damper on progress when new ideas challenge existing theory. Yes, you need that to keep down the real crackpots, but remember that experts said that traveling faster than sound would kill you, that heavier than air flight was impossible, and so on and so on and so on. The more facts an expert knows in support of their belief, the more they will attack any inconvenient fact at odds with it. Experts aren't omniscient or necessarily even intelligent - they are just people who know a lot about some thing. Knowing "a lot" doesn't guarantee that you know the important thing or the truthful thing. History shows us that over and over again, and yet "experts" continue to make profound statements as though they never will be shown to be wrong.

What the Internet doubters also forget is that the power of information on the internet is far different than any other source ever has been. Yes, a particular blogger or Wikipedia article may be nonsense, but there are a thousand (more likely hundreds of thousands) other points of view available at the click of a few keys. Sure, research on the Internet may turn up a lot of crap, intentional or otherwise, and it's also true that a lot of traditional research sources aren't yet available through this medium, or at least not without extra cost and specialized search (though that's changing too: Google to Index Libraries ). But that's a benefit, not a flaw.

"Crap", falsehood and other dissension is beneficial because it gives other people a chance to comment upon it, and the commentary may never have found its way into traditional media, and even if it did, you'd never find it as easily. Another Kuro5hin article is, I think, a good example of that: Taking the "Christ" out of Christmas. If you were researching the "keep Christ in Christmas" subject, you'd easily find this article, but without the Internet, it would have been much harder - assuming it were ever published at all. If you don't like what it has to say, your next move might be to investigate some of its assertions. Let's say you questioned "Marduk" - again, you can quickly turn up over 400,00 Google references, not all of which have anything to do with this, of course, and many that do are repetitive, but can you find 400,000 references at your library? No. Without the Internet, "Keep Christ in Christmas" might be completely unchallenged. And of course the same is true for more important ideas and subjects.

Some have suggested that the "Information Age" may turn out to be an ironic joke - that the Internet will return us to a day of Yellow Journalism. I think it's interesting that particular comparison comes to mind, because it was the ability to produce and distribute newspapers more cheaply that created Yellow Journalism and gave it the ability to reach the markets it wanted. And of course it is still with us today - just walk by any Supermarket checkout to see that. You can pick up a newspaper that will tell you how space aliens inseminated some woman in Arkansas, just as you can find similar nonsense on the Internet. On the Internet, though, you can instantly find "pregnant by space alien" and do the (amusing) research.

I see the availability of all this material as good, rather than dangerous. Yes, the world is full of morons, and now an awful lot of them are blogging. The availability of their nonsense on-line doesn't make people any less informed or any more stupid than they already were, and the ease of communication and the free flow of ideas may actually improve some of that. I don't see this as a problem.

Click here to add your comments

"Experts aren't omniscient or necessarily even intelligent - they are just people who know a lot about some thing."

That statement indirectly highlights a basic truth I learned long ago: information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom, and wisdom is not infinite.

--BigDumbDinosaur


"Experts aren't omniscient or necessarily even intelligent - they are just people who know a lot about some thing."

That statement indirectly highlights a basic truth I learned long ago: information is not knowledge, knowledge is not wisdom, and wisdom is not infinite.

"You can pick up a newspaper that will tell you how space aliens inseminated some woman in Arkansas..."

Did I tell you about how Bigfoot ate my car? When he swallowed, the battery started leaking and gave him a bad case of acid indigestion.

--BigDumbDinosaur






Fri Mar 11 23:23:42 2005: Subject: Falsehood & "Freedom"   Brian


Dear Tony,

You make some excellent points regarding freedom of expression AND our own duty to sort fact from fiction, however, there are a few subtle distinctions that need to be made here.

You wrote ;

"..."Crap", falsehood and other dissension is beneficial because it gives other people a chance to comment upon it,..."

In the case of many 'blogs' this isn't quite true. Bloggers create their own fiefdom where ONLY their point of view is represented. Any commentary that they don't like is immediately deleted. This can hardly be called a 'level playing field', and the resultant one-sided tone creates the illusion that ALL the world agrees with the argument presented... no matter how ridiculous it might be.

Sorry, but I can't see any benefit, for anyone, in publishing the fantasies of poorly informed children as "information".

We have a growing number of 'bloggers' who HAD to be fired for their misguided and sometimes ILLEGAL publishing efforts. Lacking any REAL background in legitimate journalism, they couldn't understand the difference between "free speech"... and SLANDER.

Perhaps their profound IGNORANCE... was a direct result of the poor 'education' they've received via the internet.



Sat Mar 12 10:23:01 2005: Subject:   TonyLawrence


Just because some fiefdom restricts speech by not allowing comments doesn't preven t comments ABOUT that fiefdom in a thousand other places.

We've always had loudmouthed fools and always will. The internet just gives them more voice. That's more than balanced by the amplified voice it gives to everyone else.

The power to make your views known publically used to be the domain of the rich and powerful only. That's still true to some extent - there are millions and millions of people who are too poor to blog. But the cost id far less than it once was, and that increases democracy.



Don't miss responses! Subscribe to Comments by RSS or by Email

Click here to add your comments

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar

Take Control of Switching to the Mac

Take Control of VMware Fusion 3

Jump to Comments

Many of the products and books I review are things I purchased for my own use. Some were given to me specifically for the purpose of reviewing them. I resell or can earn commissions from the sale of some of these items. Links within these pages may be affiliate links that pay me for referring you to them. That's mostly insignificant amounts of money; whenever it is not I have made my relationship plain. I also may own stock in companies mentioned here. If you have any question, please do feel free to contact me.

Specific links that take you to pages that allow you to purchase the item I reviewed are very likely to pay me a commission. Many of the books I review were given to me by the publishers specifically for the purpose of writing a review. These gifts and referral fees do not affect my opinions; I often give bad reviews anyway.

We use Google third-party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our website. These companies may use information (not including your name, address, email address, or telephone number) about your visits to this and other websites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here.