Too Much Information?

The information in our media is so relative, isn't it? Immediately, we determine how reliable the information is by which source it is given and of which political leaning they have. Yet, all the news stories are, of course, not political, but there is a slant if you will, obviously aimed at their target audience. Why does news and information have to be aimed? Why can't we just hear the information? With many people, the perception of the outcome is determined before they even have the information. This fact, unfortunately is easily categorized by political leanings, as well. Our government has had several situations, of late, in which the administration and their pundits seem to think we should not have certain information, all in the name of security, and so the conservatives blame the media and call it "leaks" rather than freedom of the press. But on the flip side of this silliness, there are the liberals that believe "information" is the solution, insisting that free speech and free press are the answer. Well, both sides are wrong. Information is not a solution, it is information, and the filtration of such should not be left to a government that finds accountability inconvenient.

What I am finding difficult to deal with is the information about the information, which used to be recognized as editorializing. I don't need Rush Limbaugh to take 3 hours of my life to tell me that Al Gore is not a scientist. On the other hand, I would find Al Gore more beleivable if he were actually setting the example of energy preservation. Let's face it, the common denominator is not solutions, it's power and capital . . . And the deal, well media is a power and has capital of it's own. As a matter of a fact, without the media, the pundits and the commentators would just be talking to thin air. I'm beginning to see that truly these commentators and news analysts are simply lobbyists for a specific topic, agenda, party, or politician. I think someone came up with a brilliant idea and I would like to give Bush 41 the credit. Someone realized the powerful influence of lobbyists and simply reversed the procedure, and it's just so much tidier and economical than all those pesky regulations monitoring favors and gifts on the Hill. This way, we don't need lobbyists to influence legislation, just elections. Maintaining the usual American protocol, there are a select few that maintain the power and the high pay to persuade and influence thinking, decisions, and ultimately outcome. The conservatives really do have the advantage, here, as they represent big business, power and wealth. These poor liberal commentators and authors that are talking about equality and ecology and sharing are kind of left to appear to be the hypocrites they become accused of being. We, as Americans truly aren't receiving too much information, what is made available is an abundance of persuasive opinions about the information released after the filtering.

He that pleadeth his cause first [seemeth] just;