“Fake news” is a fool’s term.
News is information prepared and dished up to entertain media consumers. The terms “entertainment” and “information” are essentially the same. Both are delivered on the same media platforms, and both are financially supported by advertising measured through ratings.
Information is packaged using varied amounts of accuracy, so caveat emptor. The terms “fake” or “real” news as recently presented for public consumption present only the illusion of dichotomy between so-called real versus unreal information. Applying the term “fake” in front of “news” implies the polar opposite exists – “real.” Nonsense!
Even fictional and mythological information contains strong elements of actual historical context, accurate human observation, and even accurate analysis. Both genres entertain and inform using varied amounts of accuracy and inaccuracy in their content.
Information does not solely exist in one of two polar extremes, fake or real. The term “fake news” plays to human proclivity to quick label its sensory experience as good or bad, right or wrong, left or right, holy or evil, us versus them, and republican or democrat in the dichotomous U.S.A. culture. An intellectual media consumer would focus upon the preponderance of evidence when aligning one’s opinion or coming to a summary conclusion, not fake or real.
Media consumers infected by extreme institutionalization and collectivist training quick-judge information into two oppositional categories, true or false. Consumers also absorb ready-made conclusions and opinions from favored entertainers with minimal critique.
Consumers are conditioned to suspend their cognitive immune systems thanks to years of advertising consumption and attendance in education systems that require memorization and regurgitation of questions and answers fed to them by factory schools.
Centrally planned curriculum is delivered like fast food, devoid of healthy critical analytical practice, and deceptionally labeled educationally nutritious. Centralized education bureaucracy contributes to intellectual deficiency. Students’ survival logic and cognitive immune systems become flaccid. The internal voice that should unceasingly shout into a healthy skeptical conscience “one man’s truth is another man’s deception,” eventually becomes silenced.
Advertising, marketing, public relations, political strategists, and intelligence agencies are deception industries by their very nature. Media consumers daily ingest heaping portions of these industries’ deceptive programming. Consumption of most media products requires suspension of reality and skepticism, but this practice occurs at a great cost.
Advertising is perhaps the best example of information illusion. One must suspend logic when absorbing vapid terms such as “freshest,” “newest,” “boldest,” “biggest,” “cheapest,” “healthiest,” “tastiest,” and “all-natural.” Suspending one’s discernment and the cognitive immune system is necessary when consuming such deceptive messages, but this is the nature of advertising. Consumers accept it’s not real, but it’s also not totally fake. Advertising exists somewhere in a swirling vortex of real and fake; it’s both. Advertising discernment is a practice in measuring relative accuracy of the message.
Institutionally crafted information is always smartly packaged, just like the nutritionally void, ginned-up, highly-processed-fast-food meals we consume. Is fast-food fake or real food? Food is neither “fake” nor “real” when chewed and swallowed. And food is neither “natural” nor “unnatural.” These are simpleton marketing terms for the uninformed.
For many consumers it feels better to believe a food is “natural” when slurping down factory-assembled concoctions with ingredients a chemistry major cannot recognize, and presented in bright-colored packaging with tantalizing designs. Pretty models pitch the so-called natural foods just like they sell the “real news.” The similarities abound.
“Real news” is a term analogous to “natural food.” Food labeled “natural” is just as illusory and insipid as the term “unnatural,” but no consumer considers purchasing food labeled “unnatural.” No marketing agency uses the label “unnatural food.” The term “fake news” is analogous to “unnatural food,” and equally as ridiculous. “Fake news,” “real news,” “natural food,” and “unnatural food,” are all equally illusory, foolish terms.
Consumers should reject ridiculous, insipid labels such as “fake news” or “real news.” Ridicule the purveyors of the phony dichotomous mumbo-jumbo nonsense and provide them no cognitive quarter. Begin practicing individual analysis and criticism and hone the skills.
Do the homework. Search beyond the labels. No shortcuts.
The Drill Sergeant
Now drop and give me twenty!
“Copyright © 16MAR17 by Steven A. Schwab”