OT: completely OT - but I must rant about behavior

[JordyG]

I think I agree with you, though this discussion is getting to be remarkable abstract. If the media "reports," which it at least used to, it by definition has to have something about which to report. Therefore it reflects what it sees an it reports it to whatever audience it has. I was a member of th media for nearly 20 years, and that's what I did.

Where it changes is with social media, because in many cases the reporters (the "media," if you will) are the subjects of the report. If I do something groundbreaking and post video of it on YouTube, I'm the medium AND the message, to borrow syntax from a media guru of decades ago. And this happens all the time now. The media leads the change because it is the person who is doing the leading. Now whether this is little stuff or sweeping societal change is open to debate, but it does happen.

Jordy, it is not that you are wrong. You aren't. But if you count the media as things like me posting on YouTube, things are changing. Right now they are changing on a micro level -- little advances or changes. I'd guess that over time, that is how we will increasingly find out how bigger changes are happening.

Without a doubt. Many of us are stuck in the obsolete definitions of "The Media", whereas cellphones and the internet has put that to rest. We are the media. In fact, we always have been, but these avenues have put it far more into focus. Indeed (thank you Marshall McLuhan), being the medium and the message makes us the media by both definition and default.

But the person putting forth a narrative floats or falls by the public grace. If we the aggregate agree it becomes an anchor which more rally around. If not, it sinks. But whoever puts forth the narrative does so because of the culture of the now we/they live in, by the thousandthousand choices we/they make on a minute by minute basis. This is what make us our present and future selves. Many of the thousands of narratives floated in the old nominal press, online or twittered were irrelevant 20 years ago. The major rubric's even more so. As the culture changes we the media change, and so our narratives.

 

[reno tony]

If you want to find a lack of civility, here is a simple task. Get a wheelchair, put someone in it and go in and out of buildings of all types. Office buildings, restaurants, convenience stores, banks and anyplace else you frequent. You will quickly find out who has manners. I have found convenience stores to be the worst. How inconvenient it is for a person in a hurry to have someone in a wheelchair entering the store as they are leaving. It is so sad to say that I have actually had people try to squeeze between the wheel chair and door jam and it really makes me want to get a stun gun and present this person with a lesson on manners. But, I have been told if they don't know by the time they are 50, a little stun in the nuts probably won't teach them anything. Interestingly enough, I have found the most polite people when dealing with someone in a wheelchair or walker have been seniors(which I would have expected) and children(almost always boys) around 10 - 12 years in age. Women seem to be better than men, but not by much. Anyone else have these experiences?

 

[eebmg]

Well, I have significant mobility/pain issues (both hips / knees) and require a cane. I live in NYC and need to use the NYC Subways during rush hour so the question of some one offering to give up a seat is my contribution to this thread. I am pleased to report that most of the time, I am offered a seat and the group most sympathetic by far are young men (16-30).

 

[Bigboote]

Thanks for your post eembg -- I know I'm one who's squawking loudly, but I like being proven wrong/being given hope.