Ken Rudich
Jul 22, 2017 · 1 min read

The advent of the Internet has neither been universally good nor universally bad. It has done what one might expect from a mechanism that democratizes our communications — namely, it has given an equal voice to our best human instincts and our worst human instincts.

We are better informed about the current state of society because of it — the good, the bad and the ugly. This may well prove to be a beneficial outcome in the long run, even if quite tempestuous at the immediate time or in the foreseeable future.

From a social evolution standpoint, it takes us back to a clean slate, a fresh start, a reset button, an inflection point. Indeed, that’s what the cacophony is all about — consider it an early stage in the process of renovating what works and rebuilding what doesn’t, via crowdsourcing if you will.

If improvements are made, one can anticipate a reduction in the breadth, scope and volume of the cacophony, certainly to a more manageable level than currently exists. The challenge is to produce greater harmony in the face of broader diversity, greater transparency in the face growing complexity, greater resolve in the face of enervating dread.

When framed this way, the Internet becomes an accommodating friend as opposed to an intransigent foe.

Which characterization do you prefer to choose?

    Ken Rudich

    Written by