Susan Jacoby bemoans something about political information

We thought at first there was a very interesting opinion piece elsewhere on this website today by Susan Jacoby, the author of "The Age of American Unreason."

The headline -- "Talking to ourselves" -- was intriguing because that's what bloggers do in the darkened early hours of the day as this is written. It's hard for political bloggers to get in a word edgewise during daylight because of all the posters leaving comments -- more than 31,000 here in recent times -- about politics and some other things.

Of course, as recent days have shown, virtually all Ticket commentors love The Ticket writers, think they're well-meaning, from legitimate families, hardworking humans whose perspectives they value and probably even treasure.

And even if on the odd occasion a reader arrives at The Ticket with his/her own personal perspective because of some stupid education or bizarre outside influence, after reading a few Ticket items virtually everyone leaves agreeing with almost every word published here. You can see that uniform unanimity reflected in recent comments. 

So we were struck by the first 44 words of Jacoby's treatise:

"As dumbness has been defined downward in American public life during the last two decades, one of the most important and frequently overlooked culprits is the public's increasing reluctance to give a fair hearing -- or any hearing at all -- to opposing points of view."

Her article is only two paragraphs long, albeit probably the two longest paragraphs in the history of LATimes.com. (UPDATE: Because of the vast power and influence of The Ticket, as soon as this was posted, our efficient web colleagues fixed that typographical problem and ruined the joke.)

But in those 50,000 or whatever words she says a whole bunch of what initially seemed like good stuff.

She argues basically that as the sources of information and methods of distributing it have expanded exponentially in recent years -- cable channels, websites, blogs and the rechargeable gizmos to receive them -- Americans, ironically, have closed themselves off more from info diversity. Avoided places and people that disagree with them. And gravitated almost exclusively to information sources that agree with them.

She calls it a "militant parochialism."

That's total rubbish! Couldn't disagree more. She probably lives in her car. So we stopped reading that stupid article. Came back home here where we agree with virtually everything we write.

--Andrew Malcolm

Comments

[rita forte]

Your supposed "satire" may have more truth than you want to admit.

(Which, of course, was the whole point of writing it in the first place. Thanks for reading -- and agreeing.)

[Cynthia]

After reading Susan Jacoby's piece in today's L.A. Times, I am reminded of the big story in the New York Times yesterday about the slew of Military Analysists that have appeared on all the news shows, and who have written articles for newspapers since the Iraq war began.
They were in 'cahoots' with the Pentagon as spin doctors, and not personally vetted by news networks or news publications. Some have personal business dealings with all sorts of war contractors, and have lined their own pockets further. How sad for our soldiers.
For our news media, our candidates, and the American people to not question the likes of anyone connected with the real news and truth about our government, the President and the Vice President, and Military Operatives shows we are just too damn lazy.
Our Constitution is there to protect us. Are we willing to PROTECT IT??
When reading most of the blogs on the candidates, I am amazed how shallow, and yes, one sided both news stories and potential voters are. Dumbing down?
We've hit the bottom folks.
You want to end the war in Iraq?? Then do your homework, and make sure you check as many sources of information as possible before you vote for president, and turn the channel to watch 'Days of Our Lives'.
Question authority. Question our President. Question the candidates till the cows come home. Stand up for America by being viliglant observers. Lives are being lost everyday that never had to be. News media is there to inform, not entertain. Demand that it do so. Demand it of yourself to find the truth.

[Matt]

Yah, lets go back to pre-internet discourse, discussion and debate and see how dumb we can become. Rogue propaganda via blogs is a lot healthier than channel 2, 4 and 7 and your sofa.

[bob kholos]

I agree! Very funny.

(Since I agree with you, I'll read your comment.)

[Susan]

Nice shot at Jacoby. That's giving the Librul what she deserves! Readers should feel free to tell each other how dull she is -- checking out the article first is of course optional.

[jennifer potenciano]

of course la times 's top of the ticket top gun andrew malcolm will defend--to death even, a la voltaire--the richness & depth of the opinions & ideas that bloggers & the readers/commentors post in the internet or some such media.

there's enough basis & justification for malcolm's unbridled enthusiasm for these people's efforts to participate in the national (even international) discourse on the burning issues of the day. more so for the articles wrought by well-informed, & thoroughly able journalists like andrew malcolm.

susan jacoby is utterly wrong. readers, especially the commentors, not only the writers & journalists ,or policy-makers & newsmakers do enrich this discourse through the depth & diversity of their views. even granting the jacoby variant of the left-handed putdown that 'it takes all kinds' (of commentors & comments), still there's a lot to mine in these readers' comments, just like one finds a diamond or gold buried deep in the mud.

jacoby displays such an intellectual arrogance that wouldn't sit well with the jacobins, were she living in those dangerous french revolution times. it is clear she has had her signals mixed up, for she was looking at the wrong place for the wrong thing.

a word of advice, then, for jacoby: if you are looking for scholarly treatises on politics & governance, so you won't get frustrated, you'd better look them up in the elitist intellectual journals, not in bloggings & readers' comments, or newspapers/online edition articles (news stories, features & opinion). but never, never disparage these readers' (or journalists' articles,) opinions & ideas on, say, how to fix things up. some of them might be coming up with real diamond-in-the-rough inputs, that may well be comparable to--or a lot more substantive than--your ersatz golden (read: brass) views.

on second thought, we dare advise jacoby to bone up on what the redoubtable marketing genius of a guru, peter drucker, says of these supposedly scholarly journals compare with popular publications in terms of educating the public. you just might have the shock of your life, swanie.****

[rhbee]

Not bad for a satirical look, too bad your reader (s ?) will just take your word for it and not check out the opinion first. No wait, that's what she is talking about isn't?