| > Democracy depends on connection, and the free exchange of ideas among an intelligent and informed populace, even in the presence of falsehood and rumor. That works as long as there are ways to ascertain what is rumor and falsehood and what is fact. As soon as that is impossible the S/N ratio drops to the point where you have a net negative making it much harder to engage in critical thinking. That's why the bot army operators don't really care which side of a particular argument they are taking, all they care about is - just like any other ad network, ironically - engagement so that there are less braincycles left over to think about the stuff that really matters. > The problem here is not democracy being unable to weather the internet, any more than television, newspapers or radio Television, newspapers or radio as a rule were not - RT excepted - usually under the control of ideological or actual enemies. And when they were - such as Radio Free Europe - the powers that be tried what they could to control the message. So now we are starting to see what happens when there is no way to control the message at all and individuals can be targeted with messages that are tailor made to excite and enrage them about subjects they care deeply about. > but of society trading healthy skepticism for cynicism, encouraging disengagement from the political process and failing to raise the electorate democracy needs. I'd love to live in that place but I haven't found it yet. For the most part people are not at all happy to have to expend time to get educated about subjects they care about, they prefer to have their opinion pre-chewed and in short to repeat soundbites, preferably short enough to be made into bumper stickers. |
Are you saying that is that the job of the State?