Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Blog Entry 22

I dropped my absentee ballot in the mailbox yesterday and walked over to a nearby coffee shop afterwards to sit down and read the local paper. One of the articles quickly caught my eye. It was about the increased use of Internet by politicians to berate each other and sling the usual mud back and forth at eachother. The portion of the article that interested me was the part that spoke about the unregulation of facts and truths and that it was a virtual free for all between candidates and that when it came to cyber space, anything goes, regardless of validity. Apparently candidates know if they post a fact or make a claim in an newspaper article or interview that they can be called out on that at anytime, but the Internet is a little more murky. So whats the difference? I consider the Internet a reputable news source today, yes I know that anybody can get on a computer and post anything they want and rant and rave all day long. But what about official websites and personal pages like face book? Should they not be help accountable for the information they contain? With our increased reliance on the Internet and cyberspace growing by the hour we need to do a better job of holding people accountable for the information or misinformation that is contained in their websites and postings.

1 comment:

  1. Hi, Jason. This is a very important point. I like the proliferation of information on the Internet, as it gives a public voice to all kinds of people and makes all kinds of odd information readily available. The Internet feels like the other half of my brain! :) Yet, with the increase of "free" information, we are losing our investment in the "free" press, particularly investigative journalism, which is much more expensive than reality TV. The news seems to becoming much more about hawking products and providing traffic information than really inquiring into facts regarding topics that affect power dynamics in our lives. That is scary to me. Nancy

    ReplyDelete