Opinions – the new Road Rage

Opinions have become dangerous things.

Opinions are for things like ‘favourite colours’, ‘how we feel about celebrities’ or a hair-do. However, in the post-www and now post social media world opinions have become rights, statements and facts that everyone must fall in line with or else!... from a suitably safe distance of course.

In the past as now our opinions have largely been fed to us by people clever enough to manipulate our need to belong to groups. There is one key thing that’s changed from the leafleting which the printing press allowed and which led to the popular press and it’s not just the speed and reach of the internet: it’s participation. We now have, thanks to these great democratisers, a whole new outlet for Road Rage.

We are not at the point of catastrophic failure and decent into world war, yet. We do have an information media which needs click-bait-esque headlines to get attention and ownership which is extremely influential to the point, in many cases, of just being PR. Opinions are fuelled by images of usually small numbers of highly vocal extremists ranting and raving… in some cases just one highly vocal extremist ranting and raving and certainly the temperature, like that of the Earth, on average, with notable hot-spots, is rising. The result, since we see it everywhere, has been the ‘normalising’ of extreme positions and we are becoming increasingly immune to seeing them.

A little indulgent rhetoricity: when something needs to be done right to whom should we, are we wise to, turn? For instance, a serious medical event, our house falling down, or even a car that will not start no matter what… how about tooth ache? We seek expert advice and if we’re wise, we follow it, right?

Who are these ‘Experts’? Are they ranting and raving, snarling and threatening populists with their own very obvious agenda? It seems so…

Such ‘Manic Street Preachers’ who now have a platform that’s more powerful than any propaganda machine could have wished for (actually, that seems to be how it was designed) – social media, are as I’ve said in a recent article here on LinkedIn to be ostracised and isolated. The problem is of course that the views and opinions of these people are right there on the internet alongside informed considered expert advice and information. One is more ‘shouty’ than the other of course.

I have seen the idea that these snorting rampaging zealots should be engaged with and offered debate. I can see merit in this and I used to think that way too. I’ve come to realise however that doing so only acts as a recruiting sergeant for their cause, giving them succour to re-double their efforts and attract more disenchanted followers in search of what appears to be a charismatic ‘leader’. These used to be Cults but these are relatively easy to spot these days (except most of the people in them think everyone outside them is in one…); now we have ‘movements’ of false information whose followers all feed each other with nonsense.

So, I humbly suggest that when it comes to matters of science and the public and environmental good it is wise to trust our experts and further, that we elect Governments and representatives that trust our experts.

Expert advice and information is usually recognisable by it’s calm delivery, presentations of evidence and it comes from people who can be recognised as having expertise in their field. That doesn’t mean it’s always ‘correct’ and any such expert should welcome informed debate from their peers and other leaned commentators. Conversely, self-interest is usually delivered with bluster and trump-eting (I had to…), is full of political bias (in either or any direction) or clumsily hidden ‘buy this’ funnelling and one is left feeling that if one doesn’t agree they’d better not say anything… or else!

The rest of us great unwashed are of course are at liberty to consider what we see and hear and form our positions which we can heartily debate them amongst ourselves. This used to take the form of (where I come from) impassioned debate in the pub over a few pints. Now all that has spilled over into and onto what we spend much of our time looking at and listening with and that get’s most of our attention and pretty much all our information from – screens and earbuds. It’s 99% (I made that up) ‘banter’ folks, it was never meant to be this serious!

I’m not being a snob here (I am a snob, but I’m not being one here), having been through and continuing to go through rigorous intellectual and academic challenges and leaning, I really do conclude that those best positioned and informed should inform. I don’t think it’s at all helpful for people with Certificates from the University of YouTube to get involved. Certainly, I don’t think it wise for reasonable people to engage with them (note to self).

Opinions are absolutely fine. No problem at all. I think Green is the best colour because it’s my favourite, but I also like yellows and oranges. I just don’t like beige at all! I like Ricky Gervais and Bill Maher and I can’t stand anything remotely Kardashian. I think Bowie’s hair in the 90s when he stopped touring was his coolest hair-do if not the coolest hair-do and I can’t stand the razor-cut beardy look with shaved sides. Why, because I do and I think anyone that doesn’t agree with the last two is not cool. I’d still have a cup of tea and chin wag with them though, I wouldn’t want to duff ‘em up.