I read an article in the July issue of Playboy written by the unlikeliest of people, comedian Gilbert Gottfried. It's entitled 'The Apology Epidemic'. He was talking, to stretch a point slightly, about the issue of social media affording everyone a form of equivalency that's really not justified. His best example, though he uses several, is his much heralded dismissal as voice of the AFLAC duck following several highly offensive jokes he made, and the corresponding reaction to them, on Twitter following the Japanese tsunami.
The point he was making and that I'm picking up on here is that Gilbert Gottfried has made a good living for several decades being a tasteless comedian. You can choose to laugh (as I often have) or you can be embarrassed (as I also have) that anyone would have the nerve to use the suffering of others as grist for the comedy mill.
What has Gottfried got to do with opinion and social media? Well, I have no problem with everyone having an opinion. I don't even have a problem with many or even most people believing they are as smart as anybody else (even though they're not!). But I have a huge problem with a 140 character medium affording any goof with 3 'followers' the ability to publish outrageous statements about anything and/or anybody with little, if any, concern about potential recourse - because there is none. Social media is a somewhat dark and Dickensian place...simultaneously "the best of times" and "the worst of times".
If not for social media, for example, how would anyone be directed to the very words you're reading now? So, taking as a 'given' the fact that these words are worthwhile and of interest, this would be the best of times. However, movie or music stars (for example) with nothing but their public platforms and no informed background whatever to support their claims can equally easily post or promulgate screed on Facebook or Twitter. That tells me it's also the worst of times. Selena Gomez, Penelope Cruz, Javier Bardem...take note.
Do you remember the old saying "if you're so smart, how come you ain't rich?" -- well, by today's standards of media freedom, one might well ask "if you're so rich, how come you ain't smart?" Needless to say, one does not necessarily go hand in hand with the other, no matter which version you elect to adopt!
When world events dominate the news cycle (as has been the case this summer), I tend to read voraciously...almost anything I can put my hands on, I'll devour. That is how I inform myself of what all sides are saying. I read not only trained journalistic reporting but also opinion pieces by remarkable columnists or experts but also by nobodies. So, I can look at The New York Times, The (London) Daily Telegraph; The Jerusalem Post; SKY News; CNN and Fox; NBC; Rabble, The Toronto Star; The Daily Forward; Pravda...really, I'll digest any posting with a catchy title that piques my interest. Is every publication or post reporting fact? Actually, very few are letting fact get in the way. Many report fact as spun by their reporters and editors. Others report opinion as fact. Others take fact and create opinion. The reader's part in all of this is to digest, to weigh, and to conclude what is to be believed and what is not.
When the Malaysian flight was shot down over Ukraine, the pains taken to distort and hide the facts very quickly revealed that this was a Russian action...by surrogates perhaps...but Russian nonetheless. When the military engagement began in Gaza, it became clear that this was a Hamas-initiated move and not an Israeli, Palestinian, or Gazan one (see...four corners to this one, not two). The Oscar Pistorius trial has been featured across the summer months and is about to conclude...do you believe he is innocent and that his story holds up or do you think he's one of the world's greatest actors ever? Depends on what/who you read and that now includes anyone's tweeted opinion about everything.
By now you should have discerned that you are reading a substantial opinion piece coming from me on the subject of others' opinions. So, why am I necessarily correct and why are many others necessarily wrong? I haven't an answer because I am not the arbiter of all that's good and holy. Maybe it is I who puts the garbage out and everyone else who gets it right on any issue. I, however, don't think so...and maybe that's why you're still reading at this point.
Several weeks ago, I met a young man in person who, in very short order after being introduced, made no bones in announcing that he had opinions on most things, as was his privilege. I told him he also had, as part of that privilege, the right to be wrong. That was met with a series of personal shots at me in which he questioned my qualifications over his on virtually any subject. My inside voice wanted to say "well, you are indeed entitled to your opinion but you speak as a middle-aged man who drives a car your daddy bought you, who doesn't really have a job...much less a pot to piss in, who doesn't read anything but feels entitled to think anything but base it on nothing". That was my inner voice! My outer voice chose to keep silent, lest I "make a scene", as my wife might say.
So back to Gilbert Gottfried and his Playboy article. The reason he called it 'The Apology Epidemic' is because he contends that the "one-to-many" social media pervasiveness in which we now find ourselves has led us to anyone putting pretty much anything out there and then, often receiving a barrage of "I am offended" responses. Why? Because, regardless of what anyone says, someone else will always take offense to it. The standard response to that, when pressured, is to produce an apology reading something like this:
"I wish to apologize to anyone who has taken offense to my remarks about
(insert subject here). In saying what I did, I was simply offering my view. I
did so with no intention of impugning yours. Again, I am sorry for any pain
or discomfort I may have inadvertently caused."
Was that actually a real apology? No, it was a nod to people who were sitting there, reading your words, and cursing you because they didn't like what you said. But we all want to be loved and we 'apologize'. Your opinion hasn't changed.
What's the bottom line? If you have an opinion, relate it to a series of facts you can invoke to back it up. If you do that and put your opinion out there, never justify it by just saying that merely having an opinion is your right. And finally, don't apologize for your opinion unless you have actually caused injury because you were unaware of certain factual information you should have known before you posted.
Final thought...I enjoy self-limited use of Twitter. Some people I know, meanwhile, appear to have given up life as they knew it in order to free up extra time for posting 140 character crap. Maybe it's now appropriate to do a reset on responsible use of a precious resource. In closing, let me say that I want to apologize to anyone who has taken offense to my remarks.....
Peter
No comments:
Post a Comment