Recently when reading various media articles I’m finding it more difficult to identify what is authentic and what isn’t. Do the governing authorities their still control their communities or have the media writers taken control of the minds of societies globally.
In past years authority was communicated by messengers carrying the instructions and other information to the masses, either by ‘word of mouth’ or written scrolls to be read out to the receivers of such information individually or at mass gatherings.
Kings or Queens of nations and Noblemen of regions would instruct their populations or communities by decree to state the changes they chose to install at the time, without query or consultation from the receivers. Those that didn’t adhere to the instructions of the day were often punished by severe disciplinary actions.
Much has evolved from the time when the ruler’s word of authority was without question and served to be the law of the day.
In today’s world of instantaneous cyber communications that connects individuals to the community and globally, the written word still carries the power of authority and is more far reaching than ever before, yet the voice of authority may not come from the rulers of nations as in previous times.
The fallacy of “if it’s written to must be true” appears to be the belief of the day yet it seems that written truth is becoming more of a rarity, similar to being able to farm cattle on the moon.
It appears that the balance of authority lies with those who write the content wanting to persuade the reader to think one way or another. Today’s communications allows an individual on social media to drive an opinion as much as the main stream media, whilst social and main stream media can further be retained and driven by others such as the rulers of nations in ways that may or may not be factual, in an attempt to persuade readers toward their policies and way of thinking.