Trash talk and Consequences

Just read an editorial on the Opinion Journal of the Wall Street Journal and it was concerning trash talk on the internet and how some site had wild conversations naming names and ruining the reputations of a number of law students. Evidently the site was well read and a particular student was denied employment due to the trash thrown around on that site. I think that the main concern is that the internet is like the wild west and needs to be regulated. My feelings are that the internet is a mirror of the normal lines of communication to the masses. Take those talking heads for instance. Dan Rather, who could ever forget his attempt to trash talk GWB. He used actual evidence. It could have been real at least. His story, he claimed, was real. The evidence must be out there somewhere. I know he wanted to further damage W. He had a lot of support. When the evidence proved to be false he still didn't care nor did many others. Truth after all is relative, right?

Then take most of the articles in the NY Times. Get someone to say what you want and quote them. That person may be a paid spokesperson for the side the NYT is supporting but no one has to know that. What that person may be saying could be the biggest fattest lie known to man but who cares? It's a quote and a good one and it serves the purpose of taking someone or something down.

Look at Jimmy Carter. Does he care that his recent book has been criticized by many scholars and well respected intellects? Not at all. It says what he believes to be true and if he gets enough people to listen to him it will be true.

Do I have to mention Al Gore? I thought not, or the Dixie Chicks or George Clooney or Cameron Diaz for Pete's sake. Experts each and every one with a bagful of facts to back up the nonsense they spew forth.

These college students are merely falling in line with the role models of the MSM and the people holding the microphone.