I’m reading through news stories. They have the standard series of interviews. “This person, age [xx], from [xx], says…” and one paragraph after another of people being interviewed. As I’m reading through, all I’m thinking now is, “What if they’re all full of crap? What if the case for this viewpoint is a built on a stack of people just saying whatever the interviewer wants to hear?” “What if”. Such dangerous words. Perhaps it’s better this way, I dunno. At one time, you’d hear [occupation] such as “stay at home mom”, or “PhD” and perhaps think, “Trustworthy ’cause she’s a mom” or “Trustworthy because that person’s a PhD”… but I just can’t get out of my head that we’re really in a “post-truth” era. So what happens? We read news we agree with already. There’s a strong call for “Don’t Trust The Mainstream Media”. It implies, “Trust Us Instead”. But the “Trust Us Instead” people are weaving their complicated tales built upon whatever THEY drag out using the same kind of things as the “Mainstream Media” they ask you to turn away from to turn towards them instead. So what you end up with is multiple streams of “truths”. Some say it’s two: The “MSM” (and all that’s supposedly linked to such) and “research for yourself”, which usually ends up at a media personality spinning a different tale. Some split these factions into “liberal” vs whoever is littering their diatribes with curses, as for some reason using the f-bomb liberally means “more true”? However, there’s more than two truths flowing simultaneously. They all borrow from each other, bits and pieces from here and there, presenting multiple facets of what sometimes amounts to absolutely nothing-much, connected by a series of “What If”s. So: integrity. What is it? Where is it? Who has it? I wouldn’t say “nobody does”. Some people have character and integrity. Some organizations *do* try to maintain credibility (yet they too can be pulled into the fray if they lose objectivity even for a moment). In the end, I don’t have a clear, straightforward answer except for one. Keep your “What if” in check. Too many What Ifs can lead you down some strange paths. Eliminating them entirely may be foolish but too many of them allows for a charming voice you admire (perhaps you admire the “plain speaker” with the f-bombs for example) to lead you into whatever direction they desire.

I’m reading through news stories. They have the standard series of interviews. “This person, age [xx], from [xx], says…” and one paragraph after another of people being interviewed.

As I’m reading through, all I’m thinking now is, “What if they’re all full of crap? What if the case for this viewpoint is a built on a stack of people just saying whatever the interviewer wants to hear?”

“What if”. Such dangerous words.

Perhaps it’s better this way, I dunno. At one time, you’d hear [occupation] such as “stay at home mom”, or “PhD” and perhaps think, “Trustworthy ’cause she’s a mom” or “Trustworthy because that person’s a PhD”… but I just can’t get out of my head that we’re really in a “post-truth” era.

So what happens? We read news we agree with already.

There’s a strong call for “Don’t Trust The Mainstream Media”.

It implies, “Trust Us Instead”.

But the “Trust Us Instead” people are weaving their complicated tales built upon whatever THEY drag out using the same kind of things as the “Mainstream Media” they ask you to turn away from to turn towards them instead.

So what you end up with is multiple streams of “truths”.

Some say it’s two: The “MSM” (and all that’s supposedly linked to such) and “research for yourself”, which usually ends up at a media personality spinning a different tale. Some split these factions into “liberal” vs whoever is littering their diatribes with curses, as for some reason using the f-bomb liberally means “more true”?

However, there’s more than two truths flowing simultaneously.

They all borrow from each other, bits and pieces from here and there, presenting multiple facets of what sometimes amounts to absolutely nothing-much, connected by a series of “What If”s.

So: integrity. What is it? Where is it? Who has it?

I wouldn’t say “nobody does”. Some people have character and integrity. Some organizations *do* try to maintain credibility (yet they too can be pulled into the fray if they lose objectivity even for a moment).

In the end, I don’t have a clear, straightforward answer except for one.

Keep your “What if” in check. Too many What Ifs can lead you down some strange paths. Eliminating them entirely may be foolish but too many of them allows for a charming voice you admire (perhaps you admire the “plain speaker” with the f-bombs for example) to lead you into whatever direction they desire.

[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]