One thing I can't stomach is when people use Facebook to tell me where they went for brunch or what they bought at Urban Outfitters. I really don't give a damn. It's just too much information and minutia. Is there no such thing as having boundaries anymore?
We seem to have followed that same trend this past week when it comes to discussing the raid in Pakistan that killed bin Laden. As some commentators have said already, this is likely the most "non-covert" covert operation ever. We (and now, of course, the entire world, including the bad guys) know not only which special operations unit carried out the raid, but which specific team; we know the exact number of SEALS who participated; we know they had a dog with them; we know about the new, so-called "Stealth" helicopter; we know the number of minutes the team was on the ground and who they killed and in what sequence; we know that the CIA had surveilled the house for weeks ahead of time. We know far too many details about the how, when, and where. And so do the terrorists.
In the weeks and months ahead, there is little doubt that other covert operations will occur, thanks to the data that was collected a week ago. But now, thanks to the media and a culture that loves minutia so much--and has such a poor grasp of the importance of exercising restraint and respecting boundaries--the very people our troops are stalking will be in a much better position to detect and/or avoid interception and to continue with their homicidal agenda.
When did we become such idiots?
But I thought we Jews were *all about* minutia? ; )
ReplyDeleteI read recently read an article in the NYT on the sbuject of "information" that quoted someone saying "that a copy of [today's] daily New York Times contains more information than the average 17th-century Englishman encountered in a lifetime." That's astonishing. One newspaper. Forget the cable news shows, books, websites, blogs, magazines, etc. One newspaper.
I think the problem is that technology has blurred or dissolved lines so much faster than we can redraw them or even rethink them. The Speed of Information combined with the proliferation of media outlets -- both news and social -- means that there's so much open bandwith, time and space to fill and no natural barriers to posting, printing or televising without thinking. So into the vacuum flows the minutia, making it harder than ever to distinguish between the important and the unimportant; between the critical information we need to know to make things better from the pointless trivia that distracts us from the work we need to do; between the words that bring us together and the words that divide; and between the things I would like to know about and the things that I can safely ignore.
It's overwhelming.
So to put your implicit question back to you: Where *should* we set the boundaries?
Thank you for your thoughtful response (and please join as a "follower" of our site!).
ReplyDeleteYou raise critical and salient points, and I certainly agree with you. We are only just beginning to see, and talk about, the downside of this brave new world of connectivity and information overload (e.g., the internet, social media outlets, etc.). I think we've been so intoxicated by all the gadgetry around us that we haven't really taken adequate account of how it is affecting--or damaging--our interpersonal relationships and sense of community.
As far as the question of exactly WHERE to set boundaries, I think that the answer is, as it has always been, context-specific. It varies case by case. But here are a few guidelines, in no particular order.
1. If your words infringe on another person's well-being, autonomy, or right to privacy and peace, then keep them to yourself
2. If the dissemination of information will (or potentially could) cause harm to innocent human beings, it should be withheld; this self-restraint was common practice among newspapers during the Second World War, for example
3. Unless someone invites you to share information about their lives in a public forum, and you accept, just keep private matters private
4. Use your friggin' common sense
I hope this helps a little, or at least keeps the discussion going. Thanks again, my friend....
This country is full of spoiled information age brats who think everything needs to be their business. Public relations consultants know this. High up military officials? Protect your strategies from the paparazzi. How hard can that be? You're high up military officials, you should know how to do this. Yeesh.
ReplyDeleteI would say Obama announced the details to deflect all the Trump nonsense and Tsunami fear. Negative information in the news can always be forgotten with bigger news. For example, after 9/11, no one really cared about Chandra Levy or Gary Condit, which was in the news DAY and NIGHT until it was trumped by the explosions.
Recently, every day was "Obama wasn't born here, the radiation from Japan is coming to Hawaii and California, and the economy stinks" and now...have you even heard if the plant stopped leaking? I have to check my fridge at night to make sure my Hawaiian mangoes aren't glowing in the dark (First I have to speak to the little man in the fridge to turn the light off. He has a tv in there and is well versed on waterboarding, I'm for it, he's against it, makes me wonder what he's hiding in there).
I am sad that Obama only released his birth certificate knowing he was going to announce he got Osama in a few minutes and he didn't want to spoil his moment of glory. That's just babyish.
When Bush was president I kept hearing on the news how gas was $3/gallon, sooo outrageous, now that its $5/gallon, all I see on the news is breaking information about Obama's porn.
Yes, this country needed a morale boost. Announcing details of this "covert" operation was strictly a political move for brownie points. Really? Brownie points for transparency into covert operations? I agree this is ridiculous.
Did we have to announce our ONLY method of locating terrorists so that the terrorists would know what NOT to do next time? $1.28 trillion dollars, we finally figure out a method of locating a terrorist in hiding, and what do we do? We tip off the couriers so they know we follow them.
No need in writing up a standard operating procedure on terrorist locating, Navy Seals, this process isn't repeatable.
Dunno about you, but if I was a terrorist courier, I'd anonymously post my resume on Monster.com. "Experienced international courier with excellent document routing experience, seeks management job in American corporate mailroom." Time to abandon the field work.
And so, how will we find the bad guy next time? Maybe we'll need to spend 3.8 trillion on the next hunt. It's ok, money isn't backed by gold or silver anymore, so its not like we can't print more. Get ready for gas to be $18/gallon. Chai!
If only Arnold's love child news busted out a few weeks earlier, perhaps the White House could have held onto their covert operative details.
I love this country, but this age of reality television is embarrassing. Someone needs to stop caring and sharing, and the networks need to take us back to scripted tv before or we're all gonna die from stupidity.
I want to know why there are no reality tv shows about scientists and teachers, just guidos and other idiots? We need to inspire more people to become rocket scientists, and we don't need more Jwows.
After I took a job at an oncology company and found out their goal wasn't to cure cancer, rather turn it into a long term treatable managed care illness because repeat customers make a better business model, even in light of our national health care crisis and what's good for humankind and all that, I sort of got overwhelmed with the belief that I'm surrounded by really smart idiots. Now I'm just paralyzed with indifference. I kvetch, but honestly I don't know how to fix any of us.
The right to be idiots is inherent in our constitution and capitalistic lifestyles. Me, me, me, me, now now now now, I won't be here later so who cares?
-off to eat an oreo cookie and hang my head in shame
Interesting response. Do I detect a bit of the conspiracy theorist at play?
ReplyDelete