It the following over-simplification valid? It seems to assume that there really is a grand narrative, and we have somehow lost it. Maybe the current state of journalism is a reflection not of confusion, but of realization that there are multiple perspectives and many ways to tell a story.
The question is whether hearing this multiplicity of voices spurs us to discussion and to action, or whether it is stultifying.
One Comment
Love the video…good find. I agree with you, so many ways to tell a story. And none of them are necessarily correct or incorrect, because we all have our own subjective experience of facts. Should it really be a journalist’s job to “explain” the world to us, and should we ever accept a singular explanation?
I love the idea that multiple voices spurs discussion and action–more narratives and more information leads to meaning and understanding, right? But sadly, thinking about too many people I have to answer “stultifying.” The existence of a grand narrative (or at least the illusion of one) seems somehow easier, more comforting than navigating a cacophony of truths, as on old professor once put it. Perhaps this is one of the reasons we have such an awful trend of “reality” TV.