A lot of stories in present day media is something that is really news out of nothing but rather posturing or attention grabbing to tropes that is supposed to elicit maximum response possible without thinking of the consequences of said discussions, its viability in action, ramifications or rather the impact it will have on the world. Of course, most of the times the action-reaction equation is inited with an action by the group of people that will be least impacted by said action. Take for example the current political climate. While there are lot of pressing problems that impact everyone, the policies, like the foreign policy of US, often talk about impacting “others”. This impact is supposed to create a top-down, up-bottom, high-low .. some sort of differential relationship between actor and reactor, the aggressor and the victim or some sort of 1–0 relationship dynamics. Why ? Since it is always easy to get things done in such a dynamic. Think about businesses and nations and really any interaction over the course of history. When there is a clear cut dynamics, it leads to “growth” or “progress”. Lack of it is just stall, stale, lack of growth, lack of progress, plateaued, just a boring horizontal line — all of which does not excite the people much. Even in human behavior, fast talking, acting rather than just delaying, “just do it” instead of patience etc. is often a magnet. NY or other big cities are often associated with speed rather than slow and steady. In fact, in tech circles it is often preferred to fail fast, do things fast and fail multiple times and then succeed rather than go slow and steady and succeed. The same can be seen in faster political campaigns vs someone who is slow to come online on stories. Kind of like blitz kreig ironically.
Due to this the narrative is the most important thing is present day communication. You could 99% wrong but that 1% is all you need to amplify and project an image or perspective — by the way, there are lot of consulting firms raking in moolah in presenting perspective backed by selective data — and that perspective if went viral and adopted by a large amount of masses is good enough for a story. The current political climate gives plenty of cue to it.Similarly US military spends 10 times more than second ranked military in the world. And this is not something that has happened for this year or last year or 5 years .. rather is is about past 20+ years in recent history for sure where this has happened. So it is rather laughable when the top news is about rebuilding military. But does it matter? As long as you have 100 paid uniforms and just 10k tweets you have a story. That is it, large portions of current day stories are made by just 10k tweets. How many of this twitter users are real and how many are automated and how many are paid ?
The NFL news was about 49ers Colin Kapernick — a story about someone expressing their dissatisfaction like many other people. But now there are so many twists and turns and outright, despicable calls of “love or leave” .. I mean who gives whom the right to say such things. If humans are photoshopped or have the ability to change color like chameleons — and I mean external skin color not the internal ones which they are the best in doing — the external skin color — really how much of history would have happened ? Without differences, without narratives, without clear need to demarcate between action and reactions, there would be very little happening. Maybe that boring state is exactly what is needed to flourish progress? Or maybe humans are very diverse and some need the noise and turbulence, even at the expense of others which would ultimately lead to way less peace ? I think as humanity progresses and there is more education, the very basic metric of maturity and basis for thoughts and actions should be a basic minimum standard to which humans are held accountable to while dealing with inter groups or rather with each other. That could be called a law — written or unwritten — but something that is applied uniformly and objectively and not subjectively to based on groups and organizations.