Featured image from NASA on The Commons. Follow the link for more images.
Let’s do a thought experiment. If you were a deer, living in a forest, and that is the only place you have ever lived, what would you think the rest of the world looks like? I imagine that the rest of the world would be a large forest, full of the same types of animals, trees, birds, streams, fish, bugs, and grass. The infinite expanse of the world, the solar system, galaxy, and universe would, for all intents and purposes, look like all you’ve ever known.
But in reality, the forest has edges, the terrains and climates of the world are vast and varied, the species numerous and diverse, each with advantages and challenges. But when we are trapped within our own mental framework and own frame of reference, we lose grip on objective reality.
We used to be a society in search of “The Truth.” We upheld that there was an objective reality beyond our own perceptions, and that we were a part of the greater whole. Our subjective reality, though valid, needed to have some basis in objective truth. Right and Wrong, Good and Evil, True and False each in its turn, had at least some foothold in a larger objective framework, from which we could argue and establish law, enact justice or mercy, gauge intent and motivation, and do our best to tap into the larger objective reality that we operate in through our own subjective lenses.
But nowadays we see so much emphasis on telling “my truth.” Yes, the subjective reality is the only way through which we can try to tap into the larger objective reality.
The media is living in it’s forest for decades now, surrounded by their familiar environments, fellow travelers, and ideological tribe. Terms like “flyover country” are a regular feature within those circles, since the two largest markets for the media are New York and Los Angeles. It is an easy logical conclusion that the media then tailors its narratives and practices to cater to those living in the two largest media markets. But of course, when ideology has permeated the environment, the need to be the first to report rather than getting the story right, the story needing to be “morally correct” more than “factually correct,” and, the biggest factor in my opinion, the story needing to generate clicks and ad revenue, you begin to see how much the media has sacrificed its factual credibility in favor of tribal adherence.
Rolling Stone publishes a completely unverified article about Oklahoma hospitals being overrun with Ivermectin overdoses, picked up and run with by media figures like Rachel Maddow. The media in large part is ignoring a blatantly racist attack against gubernatorial candidate Larry Elder by a woman in a gorilla mask…
Last year Antifa rioters, using Black Lives Matter protests over the death of George Floyd, caused over two billion dollars in property damage, often in minority communities. Yet the media called them “mostly peaceful protests,” while condemning protests against the various government lockdowns. Universities are actively attempting to segregate spaces in an effort to create “racial equity.” Corporations are engaging in “anti-racist” employee training by teaching their employees to be “less white.”
If the media actually lived in an objective reality, riots would be wrong regardless of the reasons, racist attacks would be called as such, or better yet, they would encourage people to wait until the facts are revealed. Media would be vetting sources, doing their research, and equally checking facts coming from the government and corporations.
Instead, it’s just an egging, just one party that is “racist,” just shut up and wear your mask, take your shot, and don’t question anything.