When I was growing up, dinosaurs had green scaly skin and clumsily drug their tails on the ground. T-Rex kicked everyone’s ass and there were some boring ones that ate plants. Case closed. Sometime over the past ten years or so, scientists realized that dinosaurs carried their tails upright for balance. And, you know, they were probably able to run fast and some of them had feathers and shit. When I first heard this, I was genuinely irritated. I mean, I was happy that science had progressed, but part of me hated hearing about these breakthroughs because what I was told when I was five was peddled as scientific truth. How is it that ‘facts’ can change over time? Nobody told me that the subject was still open for debate. They told me what a dinosaur was and every detail now dismissed as absurd lived vividly in my adolescent imagination. My mental image of big, lumbering giants roaming the ancient earth didn’t need to be fixed — or did it?
Truth. It’s such a simple concept. Very simply, it’s nothing more than what we know from our own experiences… but all too often, we allow mere guesswork to take a form that leaves an indelible impression on our minds. The dinosaur issue taught me a simple concept: most people, even when backed by immutable facts, are completely full of shit. The modern example of my scientific skepticism is the ‘Big Bang’ — though, in this case at least, our benevolent overlords have done us the courtesy of calling the tale a ‘theory’. The universe is expanding. Okay, we can observe that, I’ll buy it. That means that, if you turn back the clock far enough, all of the matter in the universe would fit onto the head of a pin. What the fuck ever. I know matter is unimaginably compressible, but millions of galaxies in a space smaller than a VW Microbus? Sorry, folks, I ain’t buying it. And isn’t the size analogy just a little too convenient? Why wasn’t the universe born from something the size of a bowling ball? Or a cherry gobstopper?
At least scientists operate under the principle of truth. They at least try to get it right and are courteous enough to say they’re full of shit when called out. Not so for journalists. Say what you will about liberals or conservatives, but more often than not, it’s the messengers that should be shot. Popular messages make for popular products, and when consumer dollars guide the headlines you can rest assured that you can’t believe a fucking word of it. Financial articles are my favorite. Markets are down mid-way through the trading day. The top link on Google Finance will confidently explain the pessimism on Wall Street. Markets suddenly rebound and close higher on the day. Google Finance will link to an article written by the same fucking publication offering an equally confident message of optimism. It’s like printing Super Bowl Champion t-shirts for both teams — sure, I understand hedging your bets, but since when does this approach apply to newsworthy sources? Does the dynamic nature of online publications absolve them from actually getting a story right? At least the shirts printed for the losing team are donated to charity. It makes the misinformation okay. Besides, nothing warms my heart like knowing that starving children in Nicaragua fall asleep at night believing that the Patriots went 19 and 0…
The part that really irritates me is the fact that journalism is a noble endeavor. It’s a profession that I want to respect, yet nobody has the balls to preface their commentary with “You know, I could be totally wrong about this, but here’s what I think…” Nobody follows up on their own material and admits when mistakes have been made. Without this honesty, how can we trust what we hear? Am I to believe that political articles are more reliable than the contradictory coverage of the market? Not a chance. And speaking of conflicting messages, this post wouldn’t be complete without a few words on religion. Two thousand years ago people prayed to a variety of gods (such as Jeff the God of Biscuits*) — how silly is that? Luckily, mankind is much more sophisticated today. We now know that God is a conservative that frowns upon sex for pleasure. Well, it’s either that, or he’s a pervert that arranges seventy two virgins to meet you in heaven. We’re still working out the details…
That’s why I prefer a humorous context when it comes to expressing my opinions. Truth makes good humor better, but it’s also completely optional. I’m fully aware that my viewpoints are founded on little more than instinct… but at least I have the integrity to admit it. That’s more than I can say for the majority of information sources that influence our daily lives. From Rush Limbaugh to the Daily Show, from the Fox News to CNBC, there are an awful lot of agendas out there… it’s just that some are more obvious than others. It pays to be skeptical… trust me, I should know. After all, bullshit is my creative medium…
More to come…
— Bingo
* Copyright Eddie Izzard, All Rights Reserved
Postscript (March 16, 2009)
One final note… MarketWatch published the following article at 1:58 PM today: “US Stocks Maintain Gains On Strong Banks; DJIA Up 160 Points. A surge for bank stocks pointed to a fifth straight day of gains for the Dow Jones Industrial Average following upbeat comments from Barclays and weekend talk of further official action to bolster the global financial system.” This article is now strangely absent from their site, as all major indexes closed down on the day. In its place appears a convenient replacement:
“Indexes unable to carry gains into a fifth session as techs falter. The recent resurgence in financial stocks ran out of steam Monday, and major U.S. stock indexes broke a four-session winning streak.”
The prosecution rests.