In the ideal world of Duckburg social ecosystem is suitably simplified to be reasonably significant in an area of \u200b\u200b10.20 comics pages. The system looks like there a little to the model of Crespi d'Adda, where even the anarchist finds his place, properly isolated in the cemetery / representation. In short, a little world in which the interpretation of the event has the upper hand on the choice of the same. The events are rare things, and then nell'ordinarietà welcome.
In our globalized world, however, the events, whose perception is exacerbated by certain notions orginate between the theories of Chaos passed in the usual sense, since they are innumerable innumerable individual interests. I think there is a quantity 'of events that saturate the individual interests without which there is a need to have even one shared with another individual for a lifetime. A liking to be honest this has always been possible for mankind. Undoubtedly, a primitive tribe might melt in the diversity of different events even in a piece of grassland, the flower people, chi il bacherozzo etc. etc. Probabilmente solo omettendo un sacco di interessi individuali si è potuto costruire, evolutivamente, una qualche forma sociale.
E qui veniamo al vero punto. Quello delle omissioni nella informazione di massa. Bhe intanto diciamo subito che senza omissioni non è data informazione di massa. Vi immaginate una telegiornale che desse notizie di interesse esclusivo per ogni singolo individuo ? Un elenco di almeno una sessantina di milioni (meno una, la vostra) di cose irrilevanti.
Quello che è interessante è notare come questa ovvia considerazione mediatica possa portare, il redattore distratto, a pensare che il tutto sia solo un problema altrui.
Per una esemplificazione della questione si see this article. Here he rails against our omission of the news, tore his clothes for the omission. Already, we are short of arguments. The problem is that the argument can be reversed in the opposite direction because it cheerfully and always trivially true.
Unfortunately I also understand that the old and unhealthy idea, which comes from a generation of teachers active in the old days of bed on fire, but that the problem is not to compare different versions of the event failed to separate fact from views. This bad idea had, however, prompt response from our national journalism reacting eliminating all the facts. Moreover even though users are not left to watch. Well aware of the failure to manage our species has responded in turn by deciding to do it yourself in the omissions. The paths of web browsing that more would be if not a series of decisions between what to take and what to omit?
And Iran has to do with this? Few and far. Again I want to keep this thing on the cynical eye of the West. The case of Iran, I'm interested more in its causes and in its effects. Iran has an interesting social composition. One side has a power generation rather old and the other a relatively young company. Missing at least a couple of generations in the middle because of the bloody war with Iraq funded and driven, at the time, the United States. Even we have about the same happens only a couple of generations (including mine) have simply been sent to the incinerator in the dustbin of history (as well ceremony of Mr. Agnelli, now deceased, who called them too many generations).
Even when I go to vote, or find people of my experiences before or after. And 'course, in cases such as Iran, that the forms of communication ("obvious" assuming the current criteria for dissemination of information as compared to the inevitable if necessary), they differ in a big way and they become the surface on which you activate the theater of conflict.
0 comments:
Post a Comment