This generation of kids...

[Pompidou]

I wonder if it's just the latest generation, or if it's anyone who's fully latched onto social media and the potential for personal stardom on the internet? The internet has given every average Joe an unprecedented capability for the proverbial 15 minutes of fame. It's all about me. Traditional media has been losing ground to the private blogger (a trend which some say is reversing, and supposedly "Internet 3.0" will be less focused on making new celebrities, but focusing on the ones we already have). Everybody's private life is now worthy of world attention, and if YouTube is any indicator, gets it. If this isn't a breeding pool for worldwide narcissism, what is? I'm not denying narcissism is on the rise, or that it's most visible in the latest generation. I'm asking, could it be any other way? Everybody is a hero on the internet. I'm about as average as a Joe gets, but even I can load up Facebook and see over 400 "friends". That level of supposed popularity isn't natural. Humans evolved to best relate to smaller clans/tribes apparently. Having so many people doting on our every word gives us all power complexes, or can, anyway.

 

[LizzieMaine]

If this isn't a breeding pool for worldwide narcissism, what is? I'm not denying narcissism is on the rise, or that it's most visible in the latest generation. I'm asking, could it be any other way? Everybody is a hero on the internet.

I agree -- if there's one thing we can learn from the Internet, it's that modern popular culture has very little worth saying, and everyone is saying it.

 

[Yeps]

I agree -- if there's one thing we can learn from the Internet, it's that modern popular culture has very little worth saying, and everyone is saying it.

I don't think we have any less worth saying than past times, but we certainly do have a lot more people talking rather loudly.

 

[Pompidou]

I don't think we have any less worth saying than past times, but we certainly do have a lot more people talking rather loudly.

In a way, this is a good thing. The perfect world would have a large variety of independent, traditional media with standards, presenting issues with at least an attempt at impartiality. The immediate pre-internet world was a world of very few voices, of media takeovers and mergers, and it's arguable that none of them were very independent from corporate and political biases. It was very hard to come to an educated conclusion by reading multiple sources, because most of the sources had the same allegiances. Nowadays, everyone is a newscaster. Everyone is a talking head and expert on all issues deemed worthy of blogging about. The variety of opinions is outstanding, but the quality of opinions is lacking. Some middle ground would be ideal. A media empire ruled by a few kingpins is lousy. So is the anarchy of a billion dissenting opinions.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Perhaps I'm biased because I *was* a professional traditional-media reporter for a good many years, but most of what I see on blogs, news-site comment sections, and all that sort of site, is essentially the same grade of opinion as you used to get from Joe the Neighborhood Blowhard, who would loiter around the post office or the gas station haranguing anyone in sight. Joe really didn't know what he was talking about, but that never stopped him. And now Joe calls himself a "citizen journalist," and the whole world is his platform.

I think what we really need now are fewer voices just screaming into the wind and more people actually sitting down and listening before opening their mouths.

 

[Undertow]

I think what we really need now are fewer voices just screaming into the wind and more people actually sitting down and listening before opening their mouths.

"...and with that, I'd like to introduce NPR, er, wait...this just in, they're losing their funding and will be shutting down. Alright, fine.

Please let me introduce Mr. Talking Head #2, in their place. He's got funding, and it appears by his gesticulations and flared nostrils, he has something to say!"

 

[martinsantos]

Exactly what my grandfather wrote little before his death, in 1975. He was a newspaper reporter and chief editor between 1937 to 1968/69.

Perhaps I'm biased because I *was* a professional traditional-media reporter for a good many years, but most of what I see on blogs, news-site comment sections, and all that sort of site, is essentially the same grade of opinion as you used to get from Joe the Neighborhood Blowhard, who would loiter around the post office or the gas station haranguing anyone in sight. Joe really didn't know what he was talking about, but that never stopped him. And now Joe calls himself a "citizen journalist," and the whole world is his platform.

I think what we really need now are fewer voices just screaming into the wind and more people actually sitting down and listening before opening their mouths.

 

[AtomicEraTom]

One thing that frustrates and concerns me about this generation is that people my age seem to remember little that happened before the 1990's. At first, I thought it was just pop culture (which is important, but not as much as other things), but also the fact that there's little knowledge about history. The only thing that seems to be known much about is wars and not much else. I started discussing this with some of my coworkers, all my age and they didn't even know about the Korean War period, one thought the Civil War was after WWI and of course no dates were known. It just drives me nuts.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

One thing that frustrates and concerns me about this generation is that people my age seem to remember little that happened before the 1990's. At first, I thought it was just pop culture (which is important, but not as much as other things), but also the fact that there's little knowledge about history. The only thing that seems to be known much about is wars and not much else. I started discussing this with some of my coworkers, all my age and they didn't even know about the Korean War period, one thought the Civil War was after WWI and of course no dates were known. It just drives me nuts.

Now that is scary.

 

[BinkieBaumont]

Its known as "Dumbing Down" Governments world wide approve of it, makes everyone easier to handle

http://www.deliberatedumbingdown.com/

 

[John in Covina]

One thing that frustrates and concerns me about this generation is that people my age seem to remember little that happened before the 1990's. At first, I thought it was just pop culture (which is important, but not as much as other things), but also the fact that there's little knowledge about history. The only thing that seems to be known much about is wars and not much else. I started discussing this with some of my coworkers, all my age and they didn't even know about the Korean War period, one thought the Civil War was after WWI and of course no dates were known. It just drives me nuts.

If people don't know history it makes it easier to repeat it. It also makes it easier for people to rewrite it they way they want it represented.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The disturbing thing is that it's often very bright kids who know, but don't *understand* history. A very smart college senior once told me, in all seriousness, that World War 2 was fought as "revenge for Pearl Harbor."

 

[John in Covina]

It seems that students receive versions of history that DON"T coincide with what was taught previously.

Is it now that many parts of education are directed by people with an axe to grind?

I fear that too many kids don't know history, have some weird mixed up version of history, or received instruction by people that teaches either bizarre urban myth type information or a truly narrow, biased view.

I can recall in high school the history teacher going through some stuff and saying "in the book they describe it this way but others report it this way" so you knew at least there was controversy. The teacher did NOT just offer just the book view or his own views. Education or indoctrination?

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

One thing that frustrates and concerns me about this generation is that people my age seem to remember little that happened before the 1990's. At first, I thought it was just pop culture (which is important, but not as much as other things), but also the fact that there's little knowledge about history. The only thing that seems to be known much about is wars and not much else. I started discussing this with some of my coworkers, all my age and they didn't even know about the Korean War period, one thought the Civil War was after WWI and of course no dates were known. It just drives me nuts.

Unfortunately we live in an age where five years ago -- much less fifty or a hundred years -- is considered by many to be ancient history! This view is by no means limited to just kids either. And without getting into a political rant there's also a significant segment that regards any time before 1970 as the Dark Ages.

As a book dealer who specializes in books on military history I have noticed a slight decline in interest in World War II over the last ten years which in a sad way is axiomatic as most young people today are at least three generations removed from the World War II Generation. Increasingly for many, the only family ties to the Greatest Generation is perhaps a great-grandfather or great-uncle whom they've either never met or barely remember.

 

[Pompidou]

It seems that students receive versions of history that DON"T coincide with what was taught previously.

Is it now that many parts of education are directed by people with an axe to grind?

I fear that too many kids don't know history, have some weird mixed up version of history, or received instruction by people that teaches either bizarre urban myth type information or a truly narrow, biased view.

I can recall in high school the history teacher going through some stuff and saying "in the book they describe it this way but others report it this way" so you knew at least there was controversy. The teacher did NOT just offer just the book view or his own views. Education or indoctrination?

History today is being taught with a greater sensitivity to other cultures, and political correctness in general. Sometimes, this is a good thing. For example, it knocked Christopher Columbus off his pedestal and portrayed him as the less than admirable figure he was. That change occurred during my time in grade school. In grades k-7, he was the heroic explorer who discovered the new world. By the time I graduated college, he was an inept explorer that led a band of rapists to spread STDs to the western hemisphere which was clearly already discovered, and had already been rediscovered by vikings 400 years prior. How things change. I agree with you in that the best way to teach is to present multiple views and encourage students to draw their own conclusions and support them.

 

[StetsonHomburg]

Yes, I know all about English History, and It is simply aggrivating when I speak to other children and all
they know about history is what they learn from their awful video games! All this Call of Duty this and
Nazi Zombies this, I tell them how about reading a book or two if you still know how to read?

 

[John in Covina]

My dad who was born in 1922 had a high school education and received training as a machinist to operate the lathe and milling machine. He was a US Army WWII veteran and fought in Europe.

He would sit with me and go through what we had learned in school. His knowledge from high school education was really astonishing, in American History he was stunning. Now and again he would listen to what I told him about what we had learned and then would quietly walk me through other views.

 

[Pompidou]

Yes, I know all about English History, and It is simply aggrivating when I speak to other children and all
they know about history is what they learn from their awful video games! All this Call of Duty this and
Nazi Zombies this, I tell them how about reading a book or two if you still know how to read?

You tell them that? Hopefully they don't know what condescending means.

 

[John in Covina]

History today is being taught with a greater sensitivity to other cultures, and political correctness in general. Sometimes, this is a good thing. For example, it knocked Christopher Columbus off his pedestal and portrayed him as the less than admirable figure he was. That change occurred during my time in grade school. In grades k-7, he was the heroic explorer who discovered the new world. By the time I graduated college, he was an inept explorer that led a band of rapists to spread STDs to the western hemisphere which was clearly already discovered, and had already been rediscovered by vikings 400 years prior. How things change. I agree with you in that the best way to teach is to present multiple views and encourage students to draw their own conclusions and support them.

Taken to an end cultural relativism is taught which leads to the idea that societies that practice cannibalism, human sacrifice or head hunting are valid. By those standards then we can extrapolate that obviously everyone in the Americas today would be better off if it was still ruled by the original cultures.

 

[Fletch]

Perhaps I'm biased because I *was* a professional traditional-media reporter for a good many years, but most of what I see on blogs, news-site comment sections, and all that sort of site, is essentially the same grade of opinion as you used to get from Joe the Neighborhood Blowhard, who would loiter around the post office or the gas station haranguing anyone in sight. Joe really didn't know what he was talking about, but that never stopped him. And now Joe calls himself a "citizen journalist," and the whole world is his platform.

I think what we really need now are fewer voices just screaming into the wind and more people actually sitting down and listening before opening their mouths.

One positive is that we can all talk back to Joe Blowhard. It used to be that such a person could claim immense power by learning to channel his own personal obsessions into action. And because of our ingrained respect for institutions, no one could say or do a thing about it without running the risk of ostracism or worse.

Joe Blowhard wasn't always some moax sitting on a keg of nails down at the hardware. He was Joe Breen, and Joe McCarthy, and Comstock, and Anslinger, and Hoover. He was a very important man in this country once. He still is, but he's not invincible anymore.