informed, but full


It’s been one week since the inauguration of the new U.S. president and I don’t think I have ever paid so much attention to U.S. politics before.  I am trying not to get caught up in a… “What did Trump do today?” sort of thing.  I am feeling quite confused about what and how much I should be paying attention to…  if at all.  Other questions:  Where should I look and read to stay informed?  Am I aware of how algorithms are determining what I read?  Yesterday I read Dean Shareski’s post about similar thoughts and questions (he links other good reading as well).  A few of his points/positions resonated with me, including:

In the end, many of us are getting obese on information. I know some would argue that’s the price we have to pay. We are forced to stay informed. But staying informed today with being somewhat misinformed is extremely challenging.”

I recently changed my “Twitter bio” to mention that I was using Twitter to stay informed.  Lately though, I have been a bit disturbed by what I have been informed about.  Maybe things will settle down soon…  It still makes me feel a bit lost and I wonder if there is any point to individuals blogging, tweeting or responding with all the information (and manipulation?) and news (and “fake news”) blasting out lately.  (Well, some of the humorous responses have eased the tension some!)

Donna Miller Fry has been tackling the topic about the challenges of our current internet and online/social media worlds through a series of “10 posts in 10 days” on her blog.  She has really dug into some important questions and current realities.  She is listing all 10 posts with further good reading and listening here.

Lots to digest and balance…

One step ahead


I recently read Glen Cochrane’s blog post regarding a book he read about Jian Ghomeshi.  I haven’t read the book, but I appreciated reading Glen’s thoughts.  One paragraph in particular on his post had me pondering a good while,

I can’t help notice the role of technology here (texting), that enabled Ghomeshi to maintain a presence and a dialog that ultimately signified consent (in a legal and public opinion sense), without actually getting consent. Technology provides an easy way to maintain presence, yet also provides a way to remain ambiguous – this isn’t good nor bad in itself, except that courts and legal matters need to take such new forms of communication and relationship status into account. As does public opinion.”

write and think a lot (probably too much) about the impact of communication technologies on many things.  It can be both interesting and disturbing to me how new forms of communication are being “used” by individuals.  I often think about how technology can help maintain a presence in a “distant” way.  It comes with convenience, but I think it can still be “emotional work”.   But, as Glen referred to, Ghomeshi did what manipulators do… which encompassed how he communicated through texting.  With new communication technologies and changing norms with each, there is a lot to consider — context, relationship, skills, individual intent and purpose, etc.  I often think about cases and situations like this:  How would the situation and/or outcomes been different without texting (or.. insert other form of communication)?  I doubt there is any “one step ahead” in this for society.  We seem to continue to learn, teach, and be impacted “two steps behind”.  It this okay?  Is it always okay?

Just my jumble of thoughts amidst a confusing world of politics and communications today…