Click here (Atlantic) to read/skim an article which argues that apocalyptic obsessions risk paralyzing meaningful social progress...
Your thoughts?
6 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I agree that the media can and has blown many events out of proportion and love to use the apocalyptic moniker to make people panic. When they get people to panic and go crazy over an event like Sandy they get more stories to report on the news and thus ensure they have a never ending stream of segments to show the public. How nice it would be to go back to the time when news was carried by the local paper and national events seemed to distant to give much concern.
With the world being so small now due to the internet and telephones bad things seem to be happening everywhere. Because of this people now feel as if any fearful event could happen to them. Where you are on the planet doesnt matter anymore. The tsunami in Japan effected Alaska, and those predictions were made before that even happened and this is just one example of media taking events in one place and making it possible everywhere (just an example)
The article was interesting, and I would agree with many of its points. With all of the false apocalyptic predictions in the past, pop-culture’s never-ending fictional dramatization of apocalyptic ideas, and the media’s propensity to “cry wolf” when it comes to apocalypse, it is no surprised that we have become desensitized to and dismissive of anything remotely apocalyptic. Further, apocalyptic thinking is exceedingly good at making people feel powerless and inspiring inaction. If a predetermined apocalyptic outcome is sure to come, why should people do anything to try to change it? A better societal attitude, in my opinion, would be for people to realize that the future course of humanity rests on their collective actions and that they will have a direct impact on how that future turns out. Unfortunately, I would not know where to start to enact such a cultural change, other than to change my own attitude.
Its true that the social media picks up the juicy stuff that will get move viewers to watch. Since there are so many natural disasters happening, easily they can target the armageddon or end of the world subjects to create a bigger hype. Its all about the story and getting you viewers hooked!!
I agree that people frequently tend to exaggerate the possibility of some disaster occuring when an example of such a disaster has just recently occured, when in reality,this usually means that the likelyhood of it occuring again soon thereafter is quite low. The media definitly plays a big part in this. I also agree that it's interesting how people seem to always look to the extremes as possibilities for the world to end, yet skip over the very real examples of how the world could end, such as environmental issues. The article mentioned global warming, peak oil, and some others. There is also the chance of humans wither exceeding their carrying capacity, or already have done so. There are always people that think these possibilities are silly because it hasn't happened yet and rely on technology and human innovation to save us, just as it always has. But I think people should be a little more open minded. Though it's uncertain whether the end is nigh or not, peopel should be more aware of the impact we have.
Was it just me or was that a long article? Maybe because its almost 5 in the morning. Yeah the media uses fear, and the end of the world is scary. Fear means more ratings, more ratings means more money. They haven't changed, they are just getting better at what they do. Nothing really wrong with it, because in the end we still watch it. If there was another national disaster ill tune in.
The flashy stuff might distract us from real dangerous. But isn't that part of human nature almost. Not many people think they are going to die in a car accident, if they did not so many people would drive cars. No one thinks global warming is going to blow up there car, so people aren't that worried about it.
Humans are pretty resilient, so honestly I'm not that worried ether.
- Scott the pleasantly optimistic tired commenter.
6 comments:
I agree that the media can and has blown many events out of proportion and love to use the apocalyptic moniker to make people panic. When they get people to panic and go crazy over an event like Sandy they get more stories to report on the news and thus ensure they have a never ending stream of segments to show the public. How nice it would be to go back to the time when news was carried by the local paper and national events seemed to distant to give much concern.
Bob
With the world being so small now due to the internet and telephones bad things seem to be happening everywhere. Because of this people now feel as if any fearful event could happen to them. Where you are on the planet doesnt matter anymore. The tsunami in Japan effected Alaska, and those predictions were made before that even happened and this is just one example of media taking events in one place and making it possible everywhere (just an example)
Tazheem Rubio
The article was interesting, and I would agree with many of its points. With all of the false apocalyptic predictions in the past, pop-culture’s never-ending fictional dramatization of apocalyptic ideas, and the media’s propensity to “cry wolf” when it comes to apocalypse, it is no surprised that we have become desensitized to and dismissive of anything remotely apocalyptic. Further, apocalyptic thinking is exceedingly good at making people feel powerless and inspiring inaction. If a predetermined apocalyptic outcome is sure to come, why should people do anything to try to change it? A better societal attitude, in my opinion, would be for people to realize that the future course of humanity rests on their collective actions and that they will have a direct impact on how that future turns out. Unfortunately, I would not know where to start to enact such a cultural change, other than to change my own attitude.
Max Hesser-Knoll
Its true that the social media picks up the juicy stuff that will get move viewers to watch. Since there are so many natural disasters happening, easily they can target the armageddon or end of the world subjects to create a bigger hype. Its all about the story and getting you viewers hooked!!
-Taylor E.
I agree that people frequently tend to exaggerate the possibility of some disaster occuring when an example of such a disaster has just recently occured, when in reality,this usually means that the likelyhood of it occuring again soon thereafter is quite low. The media definitly plays a big part in this.
I also agree that it's interesting how people seem to always look to the extremes as possibilities for the world to end, yet skip over the very real examples of how the world could end, such as environmental issues. The article mentioned global warming, peak oil, and some others. There is also the chance of humans wither exceeding their carrying capacity, or already have done so. There are always people that think these possibilities are silly because it hasn't happened yet and rely on technology and human innovation to save us, just as it always has. But I think people should be a little more open minded. Though it's uncertain whether the end is nigh or not, peopel should be more aware of the impact we have.
Brandy
Was it just me or was that a long article? Maybe because its almost 5 in the morning. Yeah the media uses fear, and the end of the world is scary. Fear means more ratings, more ratings means more money. They haven't changed, they are just getting better at what they do. Nothing really wrong with it, because in the end we still watch it. If there was another national disaster ill tune in.
The flashy stuff might distract us from real dangerous. But isn't that part of human nature almost. Not many people think they are going to die in a car accident, if they did not so many people would drive cars. No one thinks global warming is going to blow up there car, so people aren't that worried about it.
Humans are pretty resilient, so honestly I'm not that worried ether.
- Scott the pleasantly optimistic tired commenter.
Post a Comment