Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Avoiding the Suppression of Progress: Part II

Did you ever notice that the same voices are heard repeatedly?

When we say the same voices, we are primarily speaking about "institutional voices" with a built in large readership or large numbers of viewers or organizational members, not letters or comments to the editor. We are not even talking about the occasional op-ed or the blogosphere. Institutional voices control the flow of information and, as importantly, the frequency with which the information is printed or broadcast.

Whether in the regional newspapers, the local newspapers, major organizations, government, the local cable editorials, guest panelists, guest columnists what have you, we seem to hear the same or similar voices heard almost exclusively.

Why does this happen?

Well certainly, if you have a point of view and you are in control of how information and opinions are released, you are certainly within your rights to proceed in any legal manner you wish. Additionally, most media and large organizations have a financial interest (and maybe a philosophical interest) in "staying alive."

But does this really help achieve progress on Long Island (or elsewhere for that matter)?

To believe it helps achieve progress, you would have to believe in the almost absolute certainty of your opinion, the information you are dispensing and the method(s) you used to arrive at your conclusions.

I believe the suppression of information and access to "institutional media" and other major information outlets prevents long term sustainable progress because it is essentially a violation of the public trust. It contributes to the "cycle of stagnation" by insuring only certain opinions and information is given "legitimate status" based upon potentially limited methodologies.

Without the public trust, long term progress (however defined) is virtually impossible.

This is why we have proposed the Meta-Portal and Citizen Media Network ideas among many others, as part of the One Long Island project. Open communication is vital in building the public trust and creating long term, sustainable progress.

Certainly events like this one are helpful as a part of the process. But, as we stated previously, isn't it really a perpetuation of the old "static" way of doing things?

New thinking needs a new "support system." One Long Island is potentially part of that solution.

More in Part III.

No comments: