Excellent analysis, Hana. While I am not the biggest fan of Bannon, there is solid logic behind his ‘flood the zone’ idea. It’s honestly doing back to the media what the had been doing. Media (on all sides), takes a news story, then puts their narrative spin on it. Segment runs ‘reporting’ on the story. Immediately, we have a panel discussion with ‘experts’ who verify the story’s spin as legit. Then the story and spin becomes the news cycle for the next 24-48 hours.
I thought your points about avoiding the flood altogether (the only winning move is to not play the game) or to avoid it for a time. Whenever there is a breaking news story, the initial reporting and what is reported 48 hours later is almost always polar opposites.
It has never been more difficult to find trusted sources of information in this country. It’s a very sad state of affairs and not sure how we right the ship.
This made me realize something I had not quite put together.
I do not watch TV, listen to radio, or read newspapers. I also do not subscribe to news feeds. I would have assumed that meant I had largely stepped outside the flood.
Apparently not.
Somehow, almost by osmosis through newsletters and the wider internet, I was still aware that the political information environment was being flooded. I wasn't following the stream, yet I could feel its effects.
That makes me wonder whether information flooding is still something individuals can simply opt out of, or whether it has become part of the surrounding information environment itself.
If so, the problem is larger than managing our own intake.
Brilliant article, Hana! "Sanity sandbagging" is a great way to describe our defenses against information overload and reflexive archiving. I'm writing your 6 tips on a sticky note on my monitor so I don't forget them. Our collective attention was stolen from us and we have a right to reclaim it on our own terms.
Narratives are tools of information compression and economy. Narratives are offered as life preservers to those drowning in the flood. Adopting a narrative, though, enlists you as a partisan of that narrative. And, that manipulation may be intentional.
If education or life experience has equipped you with the tools of analysis and background context needed to unpack a narrative thesis into the argument used to assemble the narrative from facts and theory, that’s great. More commonly, you need a trustworthy guide or reference.
Those creating and promoting AI are contributing to the flood even as they offer a solution. Probably not a trustworthy or individually empowering solution though.
Do you have suggestions for resisting the manipulative onslaught? Or, resisting the loss of our individual and social powers of critical reason that AI-search and other AI-assistance seems to entail?
Excellent analysis, Hana. While I am not the biggest fan of Bannon, there is solid logic behind his ‘flood the zone’ idea. It’s honestly doing back to the media what the had been doing. Media (on all sides), takes a news story, then puts their narrative spin on it. Segment runs ‘reporting’ on the story. Immediately, we have a panel discussion with ‘experts’ who verify the story’s spin as legit. Then the story and spin becomes the news cycle for the next 24-48 hours.
I thought your points about avoiding the flood altogether (the only winning move is to not play the game) or to avoid it for a time. Whenever there is a breaking news story, the initial reporting and what is reported 48 hours later is almost always polar opposites.
It has never been more difficult to find trusted sources of information in this country. It’s a very sad state of affairs and not sure how we right the ship.
This made me realize something I had not quite put together.
I do not watch TV, listen to radio, or read newspapers. I also do not subscribe to news feeds. I would have assumed that meant I had largely stepped outside the flood.
Apparently not.
Somehow, almost by osmosis through newsletters and the wider internet, I was still aware that the political information environment was being flooded. I wasn't following the stream, yet I could feel its effects.
That makes me wonder whether information flooding is still something individuals can simply opt out of, or whether it has become part of the surrounding information environment itself.
If so, the problem is larger than managing our own intake.
Brilliant article, Hana! "Sanity sandbagging" is a great way to describe our defenses against information overload and reflexive archiving. I'm writing your 6 tips on a sticky note on my monitor so I don't forget them. Our collective attention was stolen from us and we have a right to reclaim it on our own terms.
more sanity for our era. love the Way Back Machine to check disappeared pages
Shutting out the world does nothing against these human DoS attacks. I find it more helpful to explain to others why this is happening when it occurs.
This was enlightening and absolutely worth reading. Thank you for your time and effort and thoughtfulness.
Narratives are tools of information compression and economy. Narratives are offered as life preservers to those drowning in the flood. Adopting a narrative, though, enlists you as a partisan of that narrative. And, that manipulation may be intentional.
If education or life experience has equipped you with the tools of analysis and background context needed to unpack a narrative thesis into the argument used to assemble the narrative from facts and theory, that’s great. More commonly, you need a trustworthy guide or reference.
Those creating and promoting AI are contributing to the flood even as they offer a solution. Probably not a trustworthy or individually empowering solution though.
Do you have suggestions for resisting the manipulative onslaught? Or, resisting the loss of our individual and social powers of critical reason that AI-search and other AI-assistance seems to entail?
Great advice.