Information spreads like wildfire

In today’s age of instant information, messages can be sent from one person to many in a split second. Information is democratic – anyone and everyone has access to it quickly and easily. I can write a message on my blog, and have it seen instantly by thousands of people. I can send a message via Twitter, and everyone following me will see that message a second after I write it. I can hop on AIM and anyone also with AIM will see me and can ask/tell/explain anything they want.

Not since the advent of cable television have we been able to say so much to so many in so little time from so far away.

And this has been a double-edged sword in many cases. Because we’re constantly barraged with information, it can not only be difficult to keep up, but it can be difficult to figure out if the messages we receive are true or false, accurate or inaccurate. We try to be critical thinkers in the media we consume, and we hope our students are as well. But how can I think critically when I receive 40 “tweets” an hour and need to keep up with 24 blogs each day. I definitely believe I have my finger on the pulse of technology and changes in information, but how much is real, and how much is imagined? And at what cost?

First, consider the number of rumors flying around about the upcoming announcements at the Macworld Expo. Everyone is eager to know what Steve Jobs will introduce tomorrow. But how much of that information is accurate? The answer is: we don’t know. It’s all speculation. Does that automatically dismiss it as unimportant? Not necessarily. Does its speculative nature mean I should ignore it? No necessarily. If I choose to follow the Apple rumors, I should go into it knowing there will be a huge build up of speculation before the keynote. The other issue is, of course, how much of that speculation is coming from Apple’s own PR department making people want to know even more? We can call this fabricated anticipation. But even though the PR is fabricated, the fans’ anticipation is real.

Let’s look at the cost. As an aficionado of economics, I always like looking at the opportunity cost of everything – the best thing I have to give up in order to get something else. Right now I’m on break from teaching for another month, so looking at 24 blogs each day carries a low opportunity cost – the best thing I’d be giving up is watching CNN or taking a walk outside. But when I go back and teach four classes and conduct workshops and continue filming and editing my new documentaries, it will be nearly impossible to keep up with so much information. So my question here is: what good is the information if you can’t keep up with it? This, of course, is what news outlets do best – condense the information into a nice cute little one-hour package – but then I’m back at square one… relinquishing the power of information gathering to someone else with their own interests in mind. So going back to some economic principles – as my time spent teaching goes up, my ability to keep up with raw information myself goes down.

Just as with everything in life, a balance must be struck. I have to relinquish some of my own thinking to a trusted third party… I simply can’t keep up myself, so someone else needs to. Instead of checking 100 sources of information per day, I’ll only check 10 that will hopefully contain the best of the 100 sources. That means I can shift my brain from seeking out 100 sources to critically analyzing the compiled information from the 10 sources. We do this everyday when we watch a newscast instead of going to each place there is news happening, or read a newspaper instead of calling local and national governments ourselves for the scoop.

This is why media literacy is more important than ever in today’s information glut world.