“Power resides in those who control definitions.”— Dr. Pablo Navarro-Rivera
Writer Tom Wolfe described the 1970’s as the “Me Decade,” ten years where a self-absorbed American society focused on fulfillment and personal happiness. Throughout history eras and generations have been named to give context to the times. There has been the Depression Era, the Summer of Love, Baby Boomers, the Cold War, Generation X, Generation Y, and the Greatest Generation to name a few. These definitions usually describe a cultural attitude along with the historical reference. I think the Me Decade is still holding strong, but some times, most times, I think these first 10 years of the 21st Century could be defined as The Decade of the Big Lie.
Right from the very beginning of 2001, with the inauguration of a president elected under very suspect conditions, I can trace a trail of deceit. It doesn’t take any special insider information or connections to see the pattern, merely some observation and making a list.
Enron lied to its employees about the fiscal health of the company right up to the very end, encouraging them to buy stock and feel confident about their pensions, now worthless.
CEO’s were arrested and convicted of fraud and mismanagement in several major corporations, such as Tyco and WorldCom, squandering millions of their stockholders’ money, as well as forcing the average taxpayer to shell out just as much in bailouts and trials.
The President claimed that Saddam Hussein was hiding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. After five years of war, they have yet to be found. You can also watch the President declare that Hussein was harboring Al-Queda terrorists before the war. Or not. It depends on what you watch.
Credit card and mortgage financing companies told consumers that using their products would buy them the American Dream. Now millions are facing bankruptcy and losing their homes because of hidden, hard to understand clauses in the paperwork.
After disaster, New Orleans was told, “Help is on the way,” only it was way too little, much too late. Torture was redefined to meet a political agenda. Slogans such as “No Child Left Behind” and “Mission Accomplished” bear little meaning. Medicines, inspected and tested with claims to cure us turn out to be deadly. We have become a country that relies on a doctored sense of perception over reality.
With access to more technology we are able to unearth more facts to support (or contradict) what people are saying. It’s a media so new and fast that society hasn’t had the time or the experience to catch up and reflect on all this available information. To compensate, many of us take the “talking points” that stand out and go about our business.
Books have been with us since the fifteenth century; we have learned to have faith in the printed word. Since it takes some time to write, produce and read a book, there is more commitment to what’s printed. It can’t be deleted, edited and updated as quickly as modern technology. It also gives the reader the opportunity to deeply reflect on the meaning on the page. It challenges readers to take on other books for a wider perspective. But in recent times, the printed word has taken a nasty hit.
New media could be changing how we perceive words; click on the hypertext to get more information--chosen by the writer—and move along with the assumption you have all the facts you need. Save Time! Act Now! Read the news that fits your agenda. They couldn’t print it if it wasn’t true, right?
It’s this technology and onslaught of information that makes me consider that it’s not only the Decade of the Big Lie, but also the Decade of Distraction. We have more access to what is happening right now all around the world. Breaking news demands our attention, but only until the next tragedy or the next blistering sound bite occurs. I worry that society is training itself to focus on the immediate and not taking the time to consider long-term consequences or events that are not sexy enough to make headline news.
People will tell you how busy they are, with all the emails, voice messages and calls they have to respond to. There is no time to turn off the phone and simply drive. There is no time for reading anything in great detail. Television news stations promote “15 minutes of the news you need to know,” but do they really know what I need? Or are they telling me? What is it to “be informed,” anyway?
I remember being told not to believe everything I read. This left a lasting impression on me. I took it to heart, applying it to everything, not just what I read. Because I have endured assumptions that people had made of me, I know there is more than one side to a story. But even though I understand how important it is, I find it hard not to jump to conclusions or to look beyond my own assumptions. I think it’s hard-wired in humans as an old survival instinct. It takes a long time for a species to adapt and evolve. Technology is getting too big too fast for us to keep up.
When we talk “face to face,” or look people “in the eyes,” we are also taking in subliminal cues from expressions and gestures. We talk of “face value” as something that was once valid but now must be taken with skepticism. I find it harder when we converse through modern technology because we miss some of those cues. Even video, with just one step removed from the face-to-face experience, we can miss a part of the story. And, of course, most video is edited.
It’s interesting to watch how the generation before me and the generation after me respond to technology. While the older ones express frustration with automated telephone service and self-serve checkouts, the younger ones seem to approach it as another game, testing the technology to see how fast and efficient it is, finding ways to “hack the system” by going around the usual constraints of what the machinery asks a basic user. They have even developed a short-cut language for text messaging; another step removed from real discourse. We may marvel at the way this generation flits about the technological highway with great ease, but are they slowing down enough to get the whole story?
Because there is all this information shared with great speed, it’s easy to be lured into keeping up with the pace. It might not show any immediate drawbacks, but there could be repercussions in the future. I was taught in school that if we don’t learn from history and we forget past mistakes that they are likely to occur again. Is the fast pace of an onslaught of information going to help in the long run, or is there simply too much, too fast to outweigh its usefulness?
Of course, there is great danger in only a few deciding on what is genuine information and what is distraction. There can be misuse of power in not disclosing information. There has to be open discourse in order for people to get all the sides of a story. I am not suggesting we put any limits on what information is out there or abolish technology. My fear is that society will get used to a condensed version of what’s going on, taking it as it is and not giving important occurrences meaningful thought. The state of the world is fragile; we can’t afford to make decisions based on sound bites and distractions.
We need to be aware that despite an almost infinite amount of information that there are limitations. I believe we all know we can’t know everything. But society can’t rely on others to tell us what’s important. We have to be mindful of our own shortcomings, including our personal assumptions and prejudices, our relationship to technology and our relationship to the world. We can’t expect technology to give us the answers. We have to remember to talk to each other, discuss and debate, ask questions, to get the other side of the story. We have to avoid the temptation to move as quickly as technology. We need to slow down and pay attention. If we don’t, we may never get the truth.
So there.
