How do you know what's happening in your world? The amount of information just a click away may be limitless, but the time and energy we have to absorb and evaluate it is not. All the informatrecreate
the world won't be beneficial unless you know how to read the news. To your grandparents, parents, or even older siblings, this idea would have sounded strange.
Only a few decades ago, the news was broad-based. Your choices were limited to a couple of general interest magazines and newspapers of record and three or four TV networks where trusted newscasters delivered the day's news at the same reliable time every evening. But the problems with this system soon became apparent as mass media spread. While it was known that authoritarian countries controlled and censored information, a series of scandals showed that democratic governments were also misleading the public, often with media cooperation. Revelations of covert wars, secret assassinations, and political corruption undermined public faith in official narratives presented by mainstream sources.
This breakdown of trust in media gatekeepers leads to alternative newspapers, radio shows, and cable news competing with the major outlets and covering events from various perspectives. More recently, the Internet has multiplied the amount of information and viewpoints, with social media, blogs, and online videos turning every citizen into a potential reporter. But if everyone is a reporter, nobody is, and different sources may disagree, not only on opinions but also on the facts themselves. So how do you get the truth or something close? One of the best ways is to get the original news unfiltered by intermediaries. Instead of articles interpreting a scientific study or a politician's speech, you can often find the actual material and judge yourself. For current events, follow reporters on social media.
During major events, such as the Arab Spring or the Ukrainian protests, newscasters and bloggers have posted updates and recordings from the midst of the chaos. Though many of these later appear in articles or broadcasts, keep in mind that these polished versions often combine the voice of the person who was there with the input of editors who weren't. At the same time, the more chaotic the story, the less you should try to follow it in real-time. In events like terrorist attacks and natural disasters, today's media attempts continuous coverage even when no reliable new information is available, sometimes leading to incorrect information or false accusations of innocent people. It's easy to be anxious in such events, but try checking for the latest news at several points in the day rather than every few minutes, allowing time for complete details to emerge and false reports to be refuted.
While good journalism aims for objectivity, media bias is often unavoidable. When you can't get the direct story, read coverage in multiple outlets which employ different reporters and interview foreign experts. Tuning in to various sources and noting the differences lets you put the pieces together for a complete picture. It's also crucial to separate fact from opinion. Words like think, likely, or probably mean that the outlet is being careful or, worse, taking a guess. And watch out for reports that rely on anonymous sources. These could be people who have little connection to the story or have an interest in influencing coverage, their anonymity making them unaccountable for the information they provide. Finally, and most importantly, try to verify news before spreading it. While social media has enabled the truth to reach us faster, it's also allowed rumors to apply before they can be confirmed and falsehoods to survive long after they've been refuted.
So, before you share that unbelievable or outrageous news item, do a web search to find any additional information or context you might have missed and what others are saying about it. Today, we are more accessible than ever from the old media gatekeepers who used to control the flow of information. But with freedom comes responsibility: the responsibility to curate our own experience and ensure that this flow does not become a flood, leaving us less informed than before we took the plunge
..
How do we choose the people we fall in love with? Under the ideology of 'Romanticism,' you're meant above all to Trust Your Feelings in the modern world! Love is a mutual ecstasy at finding a beautiful person, inside and out, with the rare capacity to make us happy. The romantic attitude sounds warm and kind. Its originators certainly imagined that it would end the sort of unhappy relationships that resulted from the old ways of finding a partner; the arranged marriage! The only problem is that this call for us to trust our instincts has very often proved to be a disaster of its own.
Respecting the unique feelings we get around certain people in night-clubs, or train stations; at parties or on websites and that romanticism so ably celebrated an art appears not to have led us to be any happier in our unions The Medieval couple shackled into marriage by two royal courts keen to preserve the sovereignty of a slice of ancestral land. Instinct has been little better than calculation in underwriting the quality of our love stories. There's another school of thought: this one influenced by psychotherapy which challenges the notion that trusting instinct invariably draws us to those who will make us happy.
That's because the theory points out that we don't fail in love first and foremost with those who care for us in ideal ways. We fall in love with those who care for us in familiar ways. And there might be a big difference. Adult love is modeled on a template of love created in childhood. And is likely to be entwined with a range of problematic attractions that militate in key ways against our chances of growth and happiness as adults. We may believe we are seeking happiness in love, but what we are really after is familiarity. We're looking to recreate within our adult relationships the same feelings we knew so well in childhood and were rarely limited to just tenderness and care. The love many of us would've tasted early on was confused with other perhaps more destructive dynamics Feelings of wanting to help an adult out of control or deprived of a parent's warmth. Or scared of their anger or of not feeling secure enough
You must be logged in to post a comment.