I blame the colleges. Having to stretch simply subject matter with pointless connections of other material, calling it analysis, just to get a paper long enough to get a good grade is how so much of this shit is enabled.
If you haven't already read it, I recommend, "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton.
This adventure novel was the result of Crichton's research to get to the bottom of climate change- what's right, what's wrong, and what is an intentional lie.
There is a minor character that shows up late into the story. Professor Norman Hoffman, an expert in the field of, "The Ecology of Thought"
Hoffman intentionally comes across as a fanatical kook in public. This behavior draws attention so he can make his point.
Anyhow, he explains in vivid detail how private think tanks took away the monopoly that universities held. Prior to private think tanks, the life of the mind was the exclusive domain of universities.
Higher learning began to shift away from scholarly pursuits and became factories of fear. They manufactured all the new taboos - words you couldn't say, thoughts you couldn't think, behaviors you could no longer engage in - all were born in academia.
Hoffman also explains the PLM (politico-legal-media) Complex and how they keep us inadequate constant State if Fear
Michael Crichton, there's a quote I like that's attributed him, about newspapers and how people just accept stories they write about the subject, until one day the paper is reporting on something you might know a little bit about, maybe because its part your day to day life, or an event you were present for, etc.
Anyways you go through the article, picking out inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and maybe just an outright lie, and say "wow, did they fuck up that story." And then just go back to reading the paper as usual.
I wonder if that had anything to do when he wrote that book? People are too eager to accept opinions from an authority, and studies degrees in general are about exactly that. Its one of the reasons I believe that to do traditional liberal arts degrees like English and History effectively, you need a firm background in mathematics and sciences, or your thinking simply becomes ungrounded; you wind up becoming an aimless "creative" that stereotypes the liberal arts.
If you’ve ever been quoted for a news article, or story, chances are they will intentionally or otherwise clip what you say and end up with you severely abbreviated at best, or passing nonsense or an entirely contrary or offensive statement at worst. It’s done because are rushed, or have an angle. Most people are surprised as hell the first time it happens to them. Never talk to the police? Never talk to the press either. And if they’re going to screw up a small time local story on speed bumps, imagine what they’ll do on national stories with big names and political implications.
I blame the colleges. Having to stretch simply subject matter with pointless connections of other material, calling it analysis, just to get a paper long enough to get a good grade is how so much of this shit is enabled.
If you haven't already read it, I recommend, "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton.
This adventure novel was the result of Crichton's research to get to the bottom of climate change- what's right, what's wrong, and what is an intentional lie.
There is a minor character that shows up late into the story. Professor Norman Hoffman, an expert in the field of, "The Ecology of Thought"
Hoffman intentionally comes across as a fanatical kook in public. This behavior draws attention so he can make his point.
Anyhow, he explains in vivid detail how private think tanks took away the monopoly that universities held. Prior to private think tanks, the life of the mind was the exclusive domain of universities.
Higher learning began to shift away from scholarly pursuits and became factories of fear. They manufactured all the new taboos - words you couldn't say, thoughts you couldn't think, behaviors you could no longer engage in - all were born in academia.
Hoffman also explains the PLM (politico-legal-media) Complex and how they keep us inadequate constant State if Fear
Great book.
Michael Crichton, there's a quote I like that's attributed him, about newspapers and how people just accept stories they write about the subject, until one day the paper is reporting on something you might know a little bit about, maybe because its part your day to day life, or an event you were present for, etc.
Anyways you go through the article, picking out inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and maybe just an outright lie, and say "wow, did they fuck up that story." And then just go back to reading the paper as usual.
I wonder if that had anything to do when he wrote that book? People are too eager to accept opinions from an authority, and studies degrees in general are about exactly that. Its one of the reasons I believe that to do traditional liberal arts degrees like English and History effectively, you need a firm background in mathematics and sciences, or your thinking simply becomes ungrounded; you wind up becoming an aimless "creative" that stereotypes the liberal arts.
If you’ve ever been quoted for a news article, or story, chances are they will intentionally or otherwise clip what you say and end up with you severely abbreviated at best, or passing nonsense or an entirely contrary or offensive statement at worst. It’s done because are rushed, or have an angle. Most people are surprised as hell the first time it happens to them. Never talk to the police? Never talk to the press either. And if they’re going to screw up a small time local story on speed bumps, imagine what they’ll do on national stories with big names and political implications.