A Question For My Web-Savvy Readers

     As you’re probably aware, I have a fair number of things “going on” at any one time. Also, I’m old, and as many old persons do, I suffer the occasional lapse of memory. But I take my work here at Liberty’s Torch quite seriously; indeed, ever more so as other once-reliable voices of the DextroSphere falter and fall silent. On top of the time I spend writing pieces for this joint, I spend a couple of hours each day scanning various news and opinion sources for stories and columns about which to write on a later occasion. And while I do bookmark the links I find comment-worthy, I sometimes forget what specifically came to mind because of them that I wanted to emphasize at the time.

     I’m hoping one of you who’s more knowledgeable than I in the ways of the Web can point me toward a browser “plugin” that allows the user to add notes to his bookmarked links. It could be as stark as Microsoft’s old Notepad program – no formatting, just the ability to accept text and associate it with a particular bookmark – as long as it provides for convenient later retrieval of both the link and the text.

     Does any Gentle Reader know of such a program? Yes, yes: I could simply keep Notepad open continuously, but there are drawbacks to that approach, including mixing up the references, accidentally closing the application, and forgetting where I saved the file, that I’d prefer to avoid. Something that houses the solution entirely within the browser would avoid those hazards.

     Please post your thoughts in the comments.

Munications

     Do you municate? That is, do you shout your opinions, theses, and conclusions into the world but do your damnedest not to hear divergent views?

     A lot of people are like that, you know. It’s at the core of the “safe spaces” and “microaggressions” nonsense. Eric Hoffer would diagnose it without hesitation.

     I had a coworker, some years ago, who was full of political opinions he’s bestow upon you free of charge – indeed, whether you’d asked for them or not. But you differed with him at your peril. He’d reflexively label anyone who might disagree with him as a “fascist” at the top of his voice. In consequence, sensible persons who saw him coming would swiftly find somewhere else to be. He was the sort of municator I have in mind.

     It’s bad enough when individuals do it, but ultimately that sort of munication reduces to mere noise. It’s usually not difficult to shut it out, or at least walk away from it. It’s much worse when institutions do it. Some intriguing thoughts on the subject:

     We are saturated with media. Young people have no frame of reference so they just assume it has always been thus, but our modern mass media culture is one of those rare things that is truly new. It really was not so long ago when it was easy to be entirely uninformed about the world. It took great effort to be well informed. That’s not to say we are all worldly cosmopolitans, but the world is literally at our fingertips. More important, media is everywhere and it hard to escape it.

     This newness means that the people in charge have struggled to put it to their uses. Buying off a few newspaper publishers was easy. Controlling the three TV networks required hardly any effort at all. A free wheeling mass media with millions of bloggers, podcasters and small outlets is a different task. Rounding up the farm’s bull is a hard job, but rounding up all the barn cats is actually much tougher. The former can get you killed, but the latter has a maddening number of variables.

     When the masses started to get on-line, the “media experts” said it was ushering in an era of wonderfulness because the people would now have a say. The news would be interactive! It was not that long ago when every Progressive commentator went on and on about the wonderfulness of interactive media. I used to laugh at it as I was on-line long before the media airheads had heard of the internet. I knew those hothouse flowers would not last very long in the rough and tumble world of the internet, but like missionaries headed off to the jungle, they were sure it was going to be great

     I was thinking about that yesterday when National Review announced they had been taken over by Facebook. Like a lot of these sites, they learned the hard way that their audience was not going to just nod along and clap when instructed. Instead, they posted articles and the comments filled up with ridicule and criticism. That led to lots of comments from NR writers about the awfulness of the comment threads. Now that millennial pansies are in charge, they have turned it over to Facebook to police their comments.

     Read the whole thing. It’s worth your time.

     “Interactive media” that suppress the expression of divergent or dissenting views aren’t attempting to foster communications or build new levels of comprehension of difficult issues. They’re trying to replicate the hegemony of the three national networks prior to the rise of talk radio and cable television. Back then, CBS, NBC, and ABC would decide on The Official Line and broadcast it to Us the Unwashed without any trace of dissent. We could accept it or turn off the television.

     When blogging arose, complete with the ability of readers to insert comments on what they’d read, I thought a breakthrough was imminent. Individuals would at least have the ability to argue with one another from a safe distance. Ideas would be tested as thoroughly as possible. We’d have a chance of assembling the insights and experiences of millions into new edifices of knowledge – a chance the munications of the previously dominant mass media had denied us.

     The ascendancy of dominant institutions on the World Wide Web – Facebook, Google, Huffington Post, National Review, and other major aggregators of news and opinion – has produced a state of affairs in which individuals’ conveyances of facts and expressions of opinion can again be filtered and tamed – i.e., communications can be displaced by munications while maintaining a pretense of genuine intercourse. While the managers of those institutions don’t agree on everything, they do share a common attitude: We know best. Sit down, shut up, and listen.

     To allow one’s worldview to be shaped by an institution that methodically suppresses dissent from its preferences is to surrender all claim to an individual perspective or opinion. Yet such institutions are gradually winning a stranglehold over the Web. Small voices such as the few genuine bloggers that remain are the sole alternative. However, we’re dwindling in number. Many of the originals have ceased to write. Few with true courage of convictions have stepped forward to replace them.

     I’ve long held that “opinions are like assholes; everyone’s gotta have one.” I certainly have my own set, and I’m not shy about expressing them. But I also maintain that until your opinions are so solidly backed up by real-world evidence that there’s no significant possibility of error, you must be willing to listen to those who disagree politely. The price of not being willing to listen is high. First, you forget how to argue for your positions. Second, you insulate yourself from evidence that might persuade you to alter your stance. Third, in the worst case you’ll become a “true believer:” a worshipper in “a compact and unified church” that will have its own agenda – an agenda that’s unlikely to care much about you or yours.

     Municative institutions are such churches. It’s best to stay away from them. Any representation they make about valuing your opinion is for public-relations purposes only. They don’t want dissenters; they want disciples aflame with the faith who’ll defend it against heresy, no matter from what source.

     Food for thought.

Quickies: What’s The Matter At Instapundit?

     Has anyone else had problems viewing The Blogfather’s site?

     Lately, when I visit Instapundit, my computer’s CPU utilization jumps 20% to 30%, and remains that much higher than previously until I surf away. Moreover, the behavior of hyperlinks on the page is highly erratic: they oscillate between effective and ineffective at a rate I can’t determine. This is browser-independent, as I’ve experienced it with Google Chrome, Internet Explorer 11, and Foxfire.

     Instapundit refreshes periodically – there seems to be an active server page behind it – but if that’s the reason for this behavior, I hope someone will check the server-side code for pathologies. The site is an important aggregator for all manner of news. I’ve used many articles linked there as seed material for my own tirades. I’d hate to have to omit it from my morning and afternoon roundups.

It’s Time For Action

     No, not political action...at least, I wouldn’t call what I’m about to advocate political action. It’s more a matter of the withdrawal of hospitality from those who’ve abused it.

     Most Gentle Readers have families of one sort or another. Perhaps you’ve had the experience of the Boorish Cousin, the guy who tells dirty jokes among minor children, who slurs other family members’ religions, who comments negatively about others’ cooking or child-rearing. You’ve probably wished he’d come down with Adult-Onset Dumbness...and then refuse to learn sign language. You might have considered not inviting him to another family get-together. You might even have acted on such a decision.

     Well, in these latter days of the Renaissance Civilization, we don’t have large family get-togethers as frequently as our parents and grandparents did. In part that’s because family members tend to be more geographically dispersed than in previous decades. But in equal measure, it’s because we’ve lost the taste for them...in many cases because of the Boorish Cousin. Every family seems to have at least one, and among our several deteriorations we’ve lost the inclination to haul such a relative aside and discipline him. To avoid the need to endure him, we forgo the company of others we’d really like to see.

     Our more distant relations aren’t in our homes nearly as often as they once were. No, today, via the miracle of the World Wide Web, we admit total strangers.

---

     The powers of the Web are in large measure the powers of the Web browser. Every important browser embeds the ability, whether inherently or via “plug-ins,” to play sounds, play videos, service “pop-ups,” and download files that subsequently execute on the target computer. Some of those capabilities are easily disabled; others present a greater challenge.

     In recent years, the desire of the proprietors of popular Websites to make money from their efforts has led in two directions. The first of these is the for-subscribers-only section. Some such Websites have prospered; others, whose content has failed to inspire subscriptions, have failed. At least with such a site the potential customer has a choice about whether to spend his money on what lies beyond the paywall.

     The second approach is embedded advertising. This is the broadcast-media model: the site provides the “eyeballs,” the advertiser provides the revenue. Broadcast television has been having a rough time of it lately, which suggests to this commentator that the paid-advertising model might be on its last legs. But the Web offers more possibilities than one-way broadcast media...and some of those possibilities have had me reaching for my shotgun.

     “Pop-up,” “pop-under,” and “lock-em-in” pages (i.e., pages that attempt to prevent the viewer from leaving) are all annoying, but they can be thwarted by relatively simple actions. What’s harder to deal with are the “auto-play” sound files and videos. Quite a lot of the value the Web provides is in the form of audio or video recordings. But to impose such media on the viewer against his will leaves him worse off than a television viewer with the remote control in his hand – especially in those cases where seeking out the offending source and quelling it is deliberately made difficult.

     For my part, I’ve decided that henceforward I’ll tolerate none of it. Neither will I provide hyperlinks to such sites, for which reason I’ve just scrubbed the link to PJ Media from my sidebar. If the content at PJ Media were of greater value, I’d consider a low-cost subscription to it – but only if it were to forswear all such intrusions on my time and trials of my patience. I won’t have sugary jingles interrupting the music I prefer, and I certainly won’t tolerate the consumption of my CPU power by a video for some product I would never, ever consider purchasing.

     If you feel the same, please consider acting accordingly. Nothing but a wide-scale rejection of sites that indulge in such practices will get them to cease and desist. It might mean forgoing some minor pleasure; that’s inherent in the nature of a boycott. But consider the test of your good nature that’s involved, and how much protecting your bonhomie is worth to you and those around you.

---

     I’m an old crank; I admit it freely. But one of the prerogatives of the old is to speak one’s mind plainly, without the need for circumlocution or dissimulation. If you’re equally old and cranky, or if you’re younger and still hale but tried by circumstances, and have pondered what you might do to reduce the stress in your life, please consider this course. Nothing else will persuade Webmasters worldwide to put a halt to these noxious practices. At least, nothing else has persuaded them to this point – and the Web browser makers appear determined to facilitate their machinations.

     Thanks for reading.

Is Breitbart Under Attack?

Why are there 2700-plus comments – in many suspicious cases, exactly 2707 -- at nearly every post at Breitbart.com today?