If you frame it as a question it will inspire more brain activity in people who may disagree with you. If you frame it as a declarative they mostly just get angry.
In other words, from the context of what I think about it, the question was rhetorical 🤣
I agree with the notion of it having to change drastically in degree because of how different the landscape is.
It’s actually interesting because the community of those powerful in Hollywood and the Television networks was so small that there didn’t even need to be any active conspiracy. It would have just been implicit. You just don’t do or say anything that pisses off The Club.
Now that the boundaries around their little empire have disintegrated into 10,000 pieces, they have to explicitly and viciously enforce what the power they had implicitly held for so long due to the lack of technological avenue for competing information spread.
So the escalation can be thought of as a violent reaction to the loss of power.
Login to reply
Replies (2)
Cornered animal lashing out, knows the end is near. Can still do some damage obviously, but it’s not gonna survive the transition into uncensorable money and communication.
Hence the desperate attempts to censor and “deprogram.” I hope they get prosecuted, but even if they don’t, they’re headed for irrelevance and ideological extinction.
A simpler way to frame this:
•When the number of people who control the overwhelming majority of information dissemination is small, consensus can be maintained culturally.
• When anyone can publish whatever they think and reach millions, the only way to keep control over the narrative is to bring the political hammer down on all alternative avenues of communication.