My view on this issue is coloured by the Hillsborough tragedy in 1989. I was at that game, and at that end of the ground. So I knew what the truth was.
The lies perpetuated by police authorities, by the media, and by our politicians, for 26 years, means that I now always doubt what I am told or read.
That experience will never leave me. Until that day, I believed that in the UK we could trust in the rule of law, and expect fairness and justice. Maybe that was naive.
Bee x
Gardener and beekeeper in beautiful Scottish Borders
A single bee creates just one twelfth of a teaspoon of honey in her lifetime
Up thread Nutcutlet had a jab at mainstream media. I’m sorry, but I totally disagree. The standards of journalism demonstrated by the BBC, and the other channels, is first rate in my view. It is admired around the world for its objectivity and professionalism and, if I were to take issue, it is that the channels are too balanced, giving overemphasis to the minority view. Should the mainstream media transgress protocols, and they have got it wrong at times and very badly wrong, they are fined and made to apologise. This happens far, far less often on the almost unregulated social media channels.
If you ever have cause to come a bit closer to a story, you may be less impressed. The BBC journalists are as inclined as others to spin a story to suit their preferred 'take' on it. They may report fact, but they also imply opinion. Most of the time, because you are too far away, you can't see it happening. There are a few celebrated cases where they were called out and had to apologise, but most times nothing is said. The general public don't have the wherewithal to take on the BBC establishment. They just get cross in private and the news moves on and leaves them with a bad taste, vowing never to get near the media again.
Gardening on the edge of Exmoor, in Devon
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
I wonder if some people have more confidence in the truth prevailing than others? Some views carry more weight and greater consequences than others so an opinion that the Sandy Hook shooting is a hoax is going to have greater impact than something subjective like if someone's music is good.
It used to be the case that a 'fact' was incontrovertible.
A child has been shot and killed. There are arguments about whose fault it was, about what might have been done to prevent it, or whether it would have been possible to save the child's life. But what was not disputed was that it happened - that was a simple, demonstrable fact.
But now it isn't.
Now anyone who doesn't like the consequences that may follow the event can simply deny that it even happened and people who also don't like the ramifications seize that idea as 'true'. The Nazi Holocaust, the moon landings, mass shootings, car crashes in Paris can all now be denied as having ever happened.
Elvis is not dead, he just went home.
Gardening on the edge of Exmoor, in Devon
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
Is that true? Isn't the whole problem with truth is that to be known it has to be reported, which introduces belief? And that has always been 'true'.
I was taught maths - I would say we all were - but did anyone prove the basics or did you take for granted what you were told on the belief that the maths teacher wouldn't lie? Wasn't it Bertand Russell who went to great lengths in looking at 1+1=2 to show the axioms involved could be trusted? But the average person doesn't do that.
Isn't that then also true of all the truths we tend to accept? We believe in the source - and by virtue of that belief, we believe in what that source says.
Free speech is a goal - but the goal is shaped and sized depending on who reports that free speech.
If a minister says 'I think people who say "...all illegal immigrants should be deported immediately.." are wrong' and that gets reported by a source as 'Minister says "all illegal immigrants should be deported" then it is factually correct, but completely false in context.
We have always had this - I think Ian Hislop did a series on the BBC about how 'fake' news has been rife in news for centuries. We all have our trusted sources - but scarily, we pick those sources because they reinforce our perception of the world. How many people on here who lean to the left quote known left wing sources, ditto right wing?
That is then compounded by the net - where the clever algorithms mean you get fed what the algorithm thinks you'll like. The bubble always existed - but now the bubble is targeted.
So free speech to me is fine - the problem is always in how that 'truth' or 'falsehood' is then (re)presented.
Posts
I was at that game, and at that end of the ground. So I knew what the truth was.
The lies perpetuated by police authorities, by the media, and by our politicians, for 26 years, means that I now always doubt what I am told or read.
That experience will never leave me.
Until that day, I believed that in the UK we could trust in the rule of law, and expect fairness and justice. Maybe that was naive.
Bee x
A single bee creates just one twelfth of a teaspoon of honey in her lifetime
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
When you don't even know who's in the team
S.Yorkshire/Derbyshire border
A child has been shot and killed. There are arguments about whose fault it was, about what might have been done to prevent it, or whether it would have been possible to save the child's life. But what was not disputed was that it happened - that was a simple, demonstrable fact.
But now it isn't.
Now anyone who doesn't like the consequences that may follow the event can simply deny that it even happened and people who also don't like the ramifications seize that idea as 'true'. The Nazi Holocaust, the moon landings, mass shootings, car crashes in Paris can all now be denied as having ever happened.
Elvis is not dead, he just went home.
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”