René Descartes’ “Je pense donc je suis” was the original expression of ‘I think therefore I am’ used in the Discourse on Method (1637) rather than the latter “Cogito ergo sum” used in Principles of Philosophy (1644).

Descartes addressed himself to a broader population rather than restrict himself to scholars who continued using Latin (the influence of the Church in Rome who ignored early versions of the Bible was in Greek and Hebrew, languages of the masses). In similar fashion the King James Bible arose because the King wanted people to be able to read the original source in their own language rather than take the word of the Priest. The Plain English movement also arose from a realisation that engaging with a broad population was highly desirable.

Engaging with a broad readership is therefore not a new idea!

What has changed is the speed at which this happens. A claim has been made that “It is estimated a week’s worth of the New York Times contains more information than a person was likely to come across in a lifetime in the 18th century”. The “Did You Know” video clip also made the claim 4x10^19 (exabytes) of unique information was generated in 2008, that being more than the previous 5,000 years.

(Continuing)

Some things arise as a result:

1. The volume of information means it is no longer possible to even be aware of the existence of more than a very small subset. Stanislaw Ulam’s Dilemma, dealing with knowledge development in pure mathematics, expressed this issue in the face of some 200,000 theorems being published per year as “If the number of theorems is larger than one can possibly survey, who can be trusted to judge what is ‘important’?”

2. Following on from that Dilemma’s identification of the need for trust the process of peer review and publication subjected ideas to scrutiny before they were spread – given the nature of self publication such processes do not occur; the scrutiny may at best be produced in some public discourse. There is a breakdown of credibility in the process as a result.

Descartes was considering the issue of certainty at a time when doubt and manipulation were common. Descartes’ consideration is more relevant now than then given speed of communication, volume and total absence of assurance that what is written is other than baseless opinion.

The questions remain: How do I know the world and have confidence in that knowledge? How do I develop wisdom?, and How do I avoid doing other than ignore the maelstrom of noise because of the impossibility of making sense of it?

A role will always be there for those of known integrity to influence ideas - one upon a time journalists had that, if they return to it they will retain the influence and role.

"news is not an optional extra in our individual and collective lives, but a core necessity"

News is a core necessity for journalists and a few other professions.
Obviously, doctors need to updated about medical news, and lawyers about legal news - but doctors need not be up-to-date with legal news, nor lawyers with medical news (unless they represent medical cases).

Core necessities are air, water, food, health and shelter from the elements, some also include human contact and touch. For most of us, news is but an option, not much more than entertainment. We only like to think of it as "core necessity" because of our addiction to it. The main reason why I check the news is to avoid working when I'm tired - at least I can admit it while others don't.

My main concern is, that we waste our lives passively watching what others do and say, instead of creating our own lives using the limited and precious time that we have. Another concern is that the constant bombardment of new information competes with deeper reading and absorbing of "basic"/"old"/"established" information.

Journalism is just words. Anybody can do it.

For too long news has been hostage to the likes of murdoch and the wordsmiths themselves have become arrogant and bloated in their own self importance.
The media monopolists are rightfully shaking in their boots. The anarchy(ie. no one is in charge/control) of the internet will be their demise.
The free and equal ability of anyone to participate, that is a hallmark of the internet, trumps all of the shallow, puerile sensationalism that the "old" media serves up to us.

Most journalists are arrogant and unethical. They do anything to sell a paper or get some ratings. I for one wont be sad to see them, and their masters, get taken down a peg or two.

Yuyutsu wrote “Core necessities are air, water, food, health and shelter from the elements, some also include human contact and touch. For most of us, news is but an option, not much more than entertainment. We only like to think of it as ‘core necessity’ because of our addiction to it. The main reason why I check the news is to avoid working when I'm tired - at least I can admit it while others don't.”

The control of information is essential to manipulation of society and perpetration of oppression as well as abuse of power. “News is but an option”! The 4th estate’s role, to use Don Chip’s phrase, is “to keep the bastards honest”. The ignorant can not be part of that.

Jürgen Habermas’ work on Communicative Reason argued Citizen Responsibility to engage, the necessity of individuals being part of public discussion. We are enamoured of Citizen Rights, but deny the required responsibilities.

The phrase “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”, attributed to Edmund Burke (but probably surmised from his writings), is another expression of Citizen Responsibility. Using this idea it is clear wilful ignorance ensures evil prevails. Yuyutsu’s position “For most of us, news is but an option, not much more than entertainment” renounces such responsibilities and contributes to evil’s success.

Dear Paul,

The question arises then, how much is enough to keep evil at bay: should everyone read 2 pages of news a day, or 20? 10 minutes or 4 hours? all online news perhaps? Then what about news-contents? must we read all crime news (or whatever the authorities like us to think of as "crime"), including all the gory details? or must we read all sports news? or about what new films are around and what have those "celebrities" recently done?

The next question arising is, what if they don't care: I may read as much as I want, I may even scream as much as I want, it doesn't harm those in power one iota - "a dog that barks - does not bite" and the evil convoy will proceed just the same. Did the bastards in power ever cared whether or not we believe they are honest?

"Yuyutsu’s position “For most of us, news is but an option, not much more than entertainment” renounces such responsibilities and contributes to evil’s success."

So should everyone become a policeman?
or should everyone become a pharmacist?
or should everyone become a baker?

There are so many different ways to help those who are suffering and in need, as well as ourselves and our families, but there are only 24 hours in a day!