FYI | Jul 21 2006
By Rudi Filapek-Vandyck
We don’t have a discussion forum as such at FN Arena, not yet anyway. However, this week’s Rudi On Wednesday has triggered a surprisingly interesting correspondence with one of our readers.
We have elected to open up the debate to the wider audience of FN Arena subscribers and readers.
Reader Ted G wrote this morning to me:
“Maybe I’m being pessimistic, but I can’t see the ignorant, or the even the average guy, actually using the internet to seek or spend time on divergent views.
But I hope it’s you that is nearer the mark and not me…
The world will increasingly depend on a free exchange of information for its growth; even survival. Education of the masses is the only way to overcome the dangerous power of dictators and fanatics.”
That was in addition to an earlier email exchange following Rudi On Wednesday:
“Rudi,
“I disagree with your optimism that the internet will increase diversity of opinion and information (or at least retain it in the face of coagulation within traditional media).
“I’m guessing at numbers, but my antenna says that with traditional electronic media it is probably 70% entertainment, interspersed with 10% education (in the sense of reasoned and thought provoking social, political, and economic comment) and 20% "info-tainment" (a mixture of the two).
“Whilst information (as distinct from entertainment) is very widely distributed on the internet and probably makes up 50% of what is there, it is only accessed if you make a conscious decision to read or view it. The
information is not mixed with the entertainment as it is on the TV and radio. For example, if you are playing ‘Shoot-em-up’ on the internet, you aren’t interrupted at 8pm and given the news headlines. Another example – if you tune in / log on to get today’s news on Tottenham’s latest signing, on TV you may get the last five minutes of the international news as well, but you won’t get this on the internet. And investigative current affairs is entertainment style information, which is far less riveting when it is on the internet.
“TV and radio, because they interrupt the entertainment to give information, or they dress up information as entertainment, or they precede or succeed entertainment with information, provide an ‘imposed’ education on the masses who are, in the majority of cases, only tuning in for the entertainment bits. The internet does not do this. We can be much narrower in what we choose to read or see on the internet, and we will only read it or see it if we want to, which most won’t do, in my view.
“The information / entertainment divide on the internet is very stark, and this is the distinct disadvantage it has as a means of ‘educating’ the masses. You only get it if you want it, and it’s those that don’t want it
and won’t bother looking for it, that need it!
“The internet may increase the availability and accessibility of information, but it takes conscious choice to use it. I think we have a lot to thank the traditional media for, as in many respects they force-feed the information into the entertainment-seeking watcher, which won’t be improved or replaced by the internet
“Cheers.
Ted”
What do you think?
To participate in this debate, please send your comments and views to info@fnarena.com