With the possible spoiler of Mike Huckabee, it's clear that John McCain is set to be the candidate the Democrats need to beat in November. The irony of the ongoing battle between Hillary and Obama is that, policy-wise, they just aren't that different. There were some real differences between the…
I'm glad that someone finally starting raising probing questions regarding this compelling topic of LOL.
Here's the announcement by Choate Rosemary Hall in Wallingford, Connecticut, that the "influential" Mr. Rove will inspire the class of '08 with his words at this year's graduation. Is everyone at the school happy with that announcement? Not at all, as Marty Kaplan explains.
If you've ever had this thought that intelligent people never believe things they can't prove, consider that some of the world's sharpest and most skeptical minds have confessed in writing that they too believe things that they can't prove. You can read all about it in the 2005 Annual Question…
I stumbled onto this excellent column by Damian Thompson about the modern proliferation of pseudo-information. That is, the way various formerly obscure conspiracy cults (UFO’s, moon landing hoaxers, second-shooters, 9/11 Truthers, Flat Earthers, Young Earthers, Inflating Earthers, etc) manage to disseminate their beliefs convincingly to wide and gullible audiences.
Before Gutenberg, only reliable, church-approved texts could be widely read in western culture. Then a new technology came along, and suddenly heretics like Martin Luther or Galileo could publish widely before the church could disappear them and their ideas. It took a few generations to settle down to the publishing and editorial ethic that made it clear which information was reliable and accepted, and which was fringe. It helped that there was still some economic hurdle to wide publication, and publishers needed to maintain their reputations. This lasted until almost the end of the 20th century.
Now, we have the web. Any misinformed but layout-talented individual can produce publications (pages) that look as wise, vetted, and reliable as Britannica. But without the necessity of prissy little details like fact checking or actual expertise in the subjects being purveyed. Must it be another couple of generations before the average browser can tell fact from fancy?
