Apr 5, 2012

Holders of Truth

The human world is full of texts in many types and shapes - conversations, books, articles, blogposts, podcasts, broadcasts, videos, videoblogs, presentations, seminars... you name them - and in all of them there's a message that one part - the speaker -  gives to another - the audience. This message can have also different natures. It can be a story, can be fiction, can be a joke, can be gossip, can be the result of a research, can be an opinion, can be just babling, can be a message aimed to convince, or to make others think. The point of this is so that the audience, the receptor of the message knows before hand how to take the message. 

It happens, however, that due to ulterior motives or to negligence, some types of messages have been tampered, and are being presented as truths, when they are not. Election campaing promises are presented like a program the candidates are commited to impulse if they become president, but then, it turns out, they were only empty words playing on the needs and sentiment of the people, to get their vote, but there was no intention to act upon them. News are presented like facts, but the words of the articles are manipulated to distort the message in ways that aid the intentions of the Editor, or some close company or political party. Certain news stories are also taken out of the press, kept from the wide audience, or minimized.

It also happens now that "scholars" and people claiming to have the expertise and the knowledge about a given topic - the so called gurus - write books and articles, and maybe even endorse the books and articles of others without doing any actual, honest, REAL reseach about it. Many books are printed today, and the net is full of blogs and articles and e-books that are based on blah-blah, with messages that hold no water. In the case of books it's quite shocking often to realize that these pages have no actual value. As result, it becomes the twice fold the task of the reader, the audience, the recipient of the message to apply the filters and do teh job the speaker and the Editor should have done: check on the validity of the message.

In a world full of instant messages, where the focus has gone from the quality to the speed, it is our job to check on the sources, and if no sources are quoted, it is our duty to hold up the creibility of the message until reliable sources confirm or deny it. However, up to this point you may wonder what qualifies as a reliable source? That depends on your own experience.  Just because someone known in the international media endorses something, it doesn't make it automatically true. Even the most known people in the media lie and can be paid to say anything that suits the interests of others.

It can take you more time, but it actually pays to check out the information you receive. You can find out that a "common knowledge" is based on a false notion, but also, thorough research can make you get to the bottom of things, realized what's the truth under something and what's the reality of things.

Truth can't be summarized in a headline, and saying so, doesn't make it so. Do the legwork.

No comments: