Are there few Rational voices?

Zheng @ playpoly Sr 20091223

EST, a masterpiece titled there are few Rational voices on the Internet in China. According to the role played by China at the Copenhagen climate conference, he told the current situation of Chinese netizens in a specific group and the "reverse psychology" of deliberate adoption of negative reports. He further attacked Chinese citizens for a strong degree of same sex and often agreed with official Chinese media's rendering reports, either, they simply fall into the selective reporting of several opinion leaders, and seldom collect a sound of diversity to analyze their own conclusions.

 

First, I want to tell you a "common sense ":Bias everywhere. Domestic media, foreign media, industry experts, grassroots blogs, elite blogs, and opinion leaders are often biased. People consciously seek the opinions of public intellectuals. They often only need to verify their opinions. The reason why you think that a few people often give persuasive opinions on Parsing events in a fair and objective manner is that most of the opinions are in line with your mind. If you disagree with your subconscious, even if he is right, you will think that he is biased. For example, Ren Zhiqiang, or Li Yuchun's controversy,Prejudice or not depends on your subconscious position as the audience..

Second, domestic high-end internet groupsThere are many Rational voices,Not many have been widely spread and highlighted to the public. This is also a subject of communication or social psychology research.

The public (or even the minority) always expects to cater to their own reports andArticleIf your rational analysis (generally, rational analysis is poorly written, arrogant, or unmotivated) cannot impress them, it will not be spread, recommended, shared, clicked, or commented. People only want to believe what they are willing to believe is irrelevant to the author's rational and irrational thinking.

The problem lies in mass communication, rather than the media or rational thinker. Media and even well-known blogs consciously cater to the tastes of the masses.

Among rational thinkers, are they willing to stand in front of the spotlight? Are they willing to accept their voices? If the masses do not accept the rational thinking of these people, do not want to spread, or there is always hostility, such as Wang Shi or Ren Zhiqiang, then the rational thinking will gradually look "getting fewer and fewer, either scared or lost.

So,It is not "there are few Rational voices" (not many at all), but "there are too few audiences who are not superstitious and authoritative, not black or white, and can think rationally ", it is impossible to spread well-founded ideas for the first time. On the contrary, those arguments about force, emotion, and lust will spread quickly, and when a person's ability to receive information is limited, these voices will flood the brain, however, we cannot receive Rational voices at all.

 

For this propagation feature, there is a comment in the original est:

『

Whatever: This is a digital game of faith. That is, when a person believes in + 1 and wants to make him believe in 0, he must turn himself into-1. When 0.1 billion believe in + 1 and you want them to believe in 0, you must be-100,000,000.

That's why you didn't hear the "voice of reason", because the voice of reason cannot be heard.. They are so rigorous that they cannot shine in the online world of conversation with sound amplifier. You throw a balance of 0, + 1 people as ears,-1 feel boring.

』

 

Zheng Yu, Beijing