And the War Begins. . . .

I am obligated to start this post by announcing my personal bias. I do not like Chris Hedge. I ROYALLY do not like Chris Hedge, nor his writing style. His pessimistic, elitist tone annoys me like nothing else in an academic setting ever has. When I saw his name crop up in connection to this assignment, my first thought was, "Oh, no, not again. . . ." I, however, resolved to keep an open mind and attempt to analyze his writing separate of him. However, I failed. His choice of propogandic writing leaped out at me once again. With words chosen to elicit emotion where none was necessary (such as "largely parasites" and "blood on the floor") and the direct attacks on internet news casting, he has once again spewed his cynical opinions, for I am loathe to call it "knowledge".

However, Hedge's basic personal view is as follows: Newspapers, apparently, provide unbiased opinions on what goes on, day to day, in a city, county, or country. People of these locals, apparently, are not smart enough to think for themselves and form their OWN opinions without the help of a newspaper. ("They provide, at their best, the means for citizens to examine themselves, to ferret out lies and the abuse of power by elected officials and corrupt businesses, to give a voice to those who would, without the press, have no voice, and to follow, in ways a private citizen cannot, the daily workings of local, state and federal government.") People also, apparently, cannot get an unbiased view of the places beyond the American border. . . . He states, and I quote, "Reporters and photographers showed Americans how the world beyond our borders looked, thought and believed. Most of this is vanishing or has vanished. " He then goes on to note that the internet is not going to replace REAL newspapers. No, it's just not good enough. . . . . He blames the news producers for not knowing how to use the internet, and then he calls them paranoid. As I recall, when we, as a class, did an evaluation of our internet habits, nearly all of us turned to an online venue to seek out the news. We did not find "Cult Maker International" or "mybiasedview.com", but, instead, we turned to well-known online newspapers. Hedge notes that these websites bring in little revenue, but, nonetheless, they are newspapers. . . . . The venue and opportunity for reporting remains the same. He further solidifies his darkness by informing his readers that the American public lives under a "happy illusion that we can transfer news-gathering to the Internet." Newsflash, Hedges!!!! The internet does not gather. . . . . the people, working for the newspapers with websites, POST the information. . . . the opportunity for gathering remains the same!

Hedges is attempting to instill some kind of mass panic by stating that bloggers are replacing reporters. It just isn't so, people! The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and hundreds more newspapers function beautifully, still! If reporters WERE being replaced by bloggers, then I would be quite fearful over much of what I read. But, at this point in time, his views are nothing more than a conspiracy theory, and while he's welcome to his opinion, he's also welcome to be wrong.

I enjoyed Thompson's piece quite a bit more, both for the simplistic presenting of ideas, and for the back-up it came with. He had an idea; he found someone who did REAL research to back it up; he presented it. End of story. However, his back-up IS a bit limited. . . . . it was drawn from one school.

Before reading this article, I had never considered how much I truly write via texting, Twittering, and status updates. I have learned a new skill via Facebook, and that is summarize any activity, emotion, feeling, or thought in a single sentence, often using the a "being" set-up! (Keagen is. . . . ) Because of the new push of technology, we have learned to approach writing in an entirely different way, and that is from the standpoint of writing being moment to moment, day to day. We constantly change our status, twitter our activities, and text 10 people at once. We can drive our lives forward with a concision like no other generation, and we have the internet to thank for it.

Compare Thompson and Hedges??? From my standpoint, there is NO comparison. There is not a comparison in writing style, in ideas, in tone, in nothing. However, they both seem to have a wonderful grasp of the English language. . . . The two of them have a squaring off of ideas, at best. . . . and when we throw Sullivan and Carr into the mix, we REALLY have a brawl on our hands. These two factions split and stare at each other over a gulf of words. . . . The ideas war with a brutality like no other academic battle has. . . . Is the internet making us stupid, or is it teaching us merely to think and process differently? That, my friends, is the ultimate question. . . . where do you stand?

I realize that I have allowed my serious dislike of Hedges to overshadow much of this post with an antagonism and passive aggressiveness that is probably sickening to many of you. I apologize for the overtone, but not for the feeling.