The following is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the views of this publication.
Part II: The Internet
Greetings, loyal readers! El Hyena comes before you today to discuss The Internet; how it has transformed our lives and dominates society. Whereas we used to lean on the fence to converse with neighbors, gather at the water cooler to discuss the day’s events with co-workers, or correspond (remember pen and paper?) with friends and family, we now have the Internet. Opinion diverges on whether this change has been an improvement or an impediment. Take your pick.
The “Information Age”
We have all heard this phrase, and we can all easily see its manifestations. In The Olden Days we would read our newspaper every morning to learn of recent events and occurrences. If we were pleased by The News, or if we were outraged by it, some of us would write Letters to the Editor and patiently wait thirty days for it to appear, or not, in the newspaper. Then we would wait another thirty days to read other letters inspired by our previous letter, wherein our views might find agreement and sympathy, or disagreement and condemnation. We would then transcribe our indignant rejoinder, affix our stamp, and wait for the cycle to repeat itself.
Nowadays many of us read The News on The Internet where just about every article is accompanied by a section for “comments”, and which provides a forum whereby we can laud (or castigate) the content, praise (or ridicule) the author, endorse (or denigrate) the source (website) of the article containing The News, or direct scathing verbal assaults on those whose comments we do not appreciate. Many times those making comments digress into name-calling, character assassination, and/or infantile SHOUTING. This phenomenon originates from both directions, usually comprised of predictable characteristics. We have all become familiar with them.
Astute Observations, Self-Affirming Talking Points, or Scary Spewing
Internet comments, and those who make them, display various forms. Many are clothed in anonymity, as opposed to El Hyena, who always attributes his remarks to himself (get it?). Of course, our reaction to another’s comment universally depends on what we are pre-disposed to accept, what reinforces our political viewpoint or ideology, or what our Pavlovian conditioning has programmed us to reject. All of us who have made comments on The Internet have been called “ignorant morons”, “naïve fools”, or some other attribute of “You People”.
Some of us have something to say about everything, while some of us prefer to limit our comments to a particular subject matter or topic. El Hyena has noticed that particular “hot button” issues usually draw predictable comments from the usual suspects offering a scripted diatribe with a standard partisan viewpoint. All websites, whether it is a This Direction Leaning website, or a That Direction Leaning website, often attract the same casts of characters with the same tenor of dialogue. The specific topic of the virtuous (or offensive) article is immaterial; often it merely serves as a launching point for a general blasting of The Other Side.
Authoritative Sources and Competing Polls and Studies
Many of us who write comments sometimes attribute our “facts” to an article posted on another website, only to have our cited “facts” ridiculed and us reminded that such “facts” have been “debunked”. This is because our supporting website, to which we have posted a “link”, is deemed by our opponents to be lacking in credibility or (El Hyena’s favorite) “bogus”. Examples of these websites range from birthers-r-us.com to whatwouldbuddhado.org. Regardless of what The Others might choose to believe, our “facts” are undeniably true because we said so. Those who deny our “facts” have been living on another planet.
Our modern day marketplace of ideas also involves innumerable polls and studies. Polls and studies tend to be expensive to conduct so they are usually funded, sponsored, or commissioned by particular institutions and organizations. Whereas the reliability of a poll or study formerly required something called “valid methodology”, this restriction is no longer a pre-condition for believability. Predisposed approval and/or skepticism have evolved into the only meaningful criteria by which truth and credibility are evaluated. The hallmarks of reliability are: whether we approve, or disapprove, of the objectives of the sponsoring entity; whether the results, conclusions, and generated statistics reinforce, or conflict with, our pre-existing beliefs, and whether the poll or study is routinely cited by People Like Us or by People Like Them.
Conclusion
Therefore, today’s lesson on The Internet can be concisely summarized as follows: (1) if it said so on The Internet, it must be true; (2) your facts are bogus, but ours are righteous; (3) we are enlightened, but ya’ll are idiots; (4) this explains the shortage of Reynolds Wrap in the stores, and (5) the government doesn’t want us to know this.
Next month’s topic: Television, so stay tuned!
