Crazy Train Rolls Through by George Ziemann -- August 19, 2009 I've got this train of thought that I've been struggling with for about a week. I'm having a hard time compressing it into a form that normal people can understand, but then I remembered that I probably lost the normal people in the audience long ago. Besides, there is a shitload of crazy out there right now, which is always a good time to offer up thoughts which are merely moderately insane by comparison. My central thought concerns how the "always-on" flow of information (Internet, cable news, cell phones, etc.) has changed what we know, how we learn and our perception of what's important, who to trust and what to believe. It seems that despite the growing number of sources, it's more difficult than ever to find accurate news information. The relatively small crowds turning up for the Town Hall meetings are on television day and night recently. Just prior to the Iraq war, tens of thousands took to the streets to protest and were almost completely ignored by the "liberal" media. As a result, few people remember those protests. That's a big example that pops into mind. When I went to high school, I had no idea that the hot teachers (there was only one) offered additional after-school classes. Or that kidnappers only grab attractive blonde white women, several of which go missing on a daily basis. As an old geezer, the trouble with news today is that the entire point seems to be not to tell you anything useful. Sports is the easiest example. Old format: "Detroit over Minnesota, 5-2, details at 11." New format: "Did the Tigers claw the Twins? Stay tuned to find out." If I wanted a game show, I'd watch Jeopardy. They're not going to show the sports for another 20 minutes. If I gave a shit about the score, now my interest is sparked and I'd look it up on the Internet, find out all the details of the game and no longer need the news broadcast. And be better informed for having done so. The worst of these is the "cute story of the day," which will be used as a teaser for at least two commercial breaks, always with the false promise that it will be "right after we get back." Then it turns out that the teaser footage was really all they had. As a result, they wasted 5 minutes of time for actual news for 30 seconds of cute, time spent to lie repeatedly to get you to stick around long enough to figure it out. Part of the whole issue with the RIAA concerns their ability to get the media to print its version of "the way things are." While there is nothing wrong with this, opposing viewpoints are pigeonholed or pre-denounced. For instance, Lawrence Lessig is often described as a "copyright activist" instead of a law professor. It's a subtle thing, but it influences perception. Digg and Reddit The aggregator sites let users submit links to headlines or photos or YouTube videos or anything on the Internet. Then the rest of the users give an upvote (favorable) or downvote, which affects the rank of the link and where it shows up on the list. I check Reddit a lot (nothing against Digg -- it's a browser thing) and this system has good points and flaws. The front page (first 25 entries) is usually filled with the prime topics of the day, including the "cute" story, but at least you don't have to wait 20 minutes to see it. Part of the attraction (at least for me) is that the headline the submitter enters is what is displayed, allowing opinions, jokes and some very intriguing teasers. The second page is filled with duplicates of the front page. Many of them will appear two or three times in the first 100 entries. This may come from people posting in multiple categories. The political issues get gamed by both sides, as anywhere else. Probably the most effective strategy in this game (judging by how often one of them makes it to the front page) is to take a story from two or three years ago that sounds like it could be happening now, like the Senate voting on something stupid that failed miserably, link to it and never mention that it's old news. The same people that forwarded you the emails about the Moon looking bigger than Mars or the e-mail tax will read these stories, never notice the date, and get all worked up about it. Fark Fark pre-dates both Reddit and Digg and differs from the others in several respects, but only one matters, that being that Fark has a distinct purpose. When I'm just wasting time, looking for a laugh or maybe something to get all opinionated about and entertain you, my first choice is Fark, which many people apparently still misunderstand. Fark is all about a phenomena I noticed when I worked for a small-town newspaper in the 80s -- news that is not news. Our competitor had put out an issue with the front-page headline: "Severe Storm Misses City." Another (different storm) was, "Monsoon Rains Flood Roads." I used my allotted space (and I was editor, so I got as much as I wanted) to point out that this happened each and every time it rained, therefore it was not news. News would be if it rained and the road didn't flood. Every time they ran one of these non-news stories, I would mock it. Every year, the same recurring cycle of stories, mosquitoes in the summer, cost of heating fuel in the winter, snakes, scorpions and such in the spring. When fall comes, school is in, drive safely, just say no to everything, rah, rah, rah. Every newspaper in the country does it. Small towns are the worst. The ones we all hated most were the giant check, whether it's a casino winnings or a donation with a publicity tie-in. That's what Fark is about. It's not news (although a real story does occasionally make it to the front page), it is a mocking example of how the mainstream media still foists the same old crap on us every day. I don't comment there much, but I look at it every day. Social Networking When MySpace came along, I made a page, but never did anything with it because I was really happy with the networking going on at DMusic and its offshoot , Boycott-RIAA. Between that and my website, that was as much as I could keep up with effectively. I viewed MySpace as a place for bands that didn't have a web site. We had one. So I used the MySpace page to say, "Go to azoz.com." This saves me from rules and limits, sudden shutdowns but, more importantly, while MySpace has turned into an ocean of acts, AzOz is still a small, private pond. The only "online-community" site that I ever made an effort to be a voice in was DMusic/Boycott-RIAA, which is still the one I frequent the most. Being a creature of habit, I've been kind of happy with that arrangement. It lets me bounce ideas off other musicians, get some critiques, remind myself that there are other people out there that I can relate to. There are not many people with whom I can discuss the RIAA and copyright and not watch their eyes glaze over because they don't have a clue what I'm talking about. I expect it from most people, but when musicians do it, that's the worst. I've got a FaceBook page, too, but I don't know why. Wait, yes I do. Carl invited me. It looked like an online sort of yearbook, designed to answer the burning question, "Remember Crazy Bob from junior year? I wonder what he's up to these days..." I saw FaceBook as an improvement over MySpace's preponderous amount of bad taste in web page design, but once again, I've concentrated all of my mojo here because it just makes more sense. Now that the record labels have become involved with MySpace, I'm kind of glad I don't have any music posted there. I never did feel good about it. Slashdot was fun in the sense of the debate, but I have to switch to my laptop to use it, which I hate typing on and hate the mousepad even worse. I'm still neutral about FaceBook. I don't use it much, although I have to admit that it's handy having a tool that targets the people who give a shit, at least enough to be your "friend." I try not to overuse it, though, because I see the results of those who do. Anyone know how to turn off the news feed from someone without de-friending them? Seriously. There are others in the mix, like LinkedIn.com, which I occasionally get activity from, but not like FaceBook. And I never go to any of them hunting for friends. For me, all of these have one common problem, namely that I have to switch to my laptop to access every one of them. The laptop's keyboard is too small, I hate the trackpad, the port to plug in a mouse is on the wrong side, and the tip from another power cord fell off inside it. So I don't like to write a lot with it -- I make too many mistakes and have to worry about switching batteries all the time. Twitter I don't have a cell phone. When the smaller "don't give you brain tumors" models came out, I was wearing contact lenses. Bought a cell for my wife but whenever I tried to use it, I couldn't read the damn thing unless I was wearing reading glass. I've since gone to progressive lenses, so this isn't a problem any longer, but I still haven't switched over yet for the simple reason that no one except salesmen ever call looking for me. So whatever it is everyone is using Twitter on (iPhone?), I don't have one. Even if I did, I can't imagine posting my day-to-day, minute-by-minute activities. 8:00 -- Taking shower 8:10 -- Brushing teeth now! 8:15 -- Can I haz brekfust? 11:45 -- Can I haz cheezburger? Really, who cares? I have watched the stream of photos being posted. Surprisingly, cats seem to be the most popular thing in the world, at least on Twitter, followed by girls in their underwear in the bathroom (remember ladies, flush before Twittering yourself) and concert shots, but the overwhelming majority of them appear to be rather mundane. As we have seen with the recent Iran elections, however, when the extraordinary takes place, Twitter's mundane is overshadowed by its ability to deliver timely information (and photos) from normal people witnessing the events. I could see this being extremely useful during a natural disaster (earthquake, hurricane). The Point I'm not sure if there really is a point to this. All of these things have their uses and value, but they are all susceptible to being replaced tomorrow by the Next Big Thing.