Why do we bemoan the things that are not there or not included? What is it about those things that are missing that engenders such emotion in us? Recent news about new tech that comes with so much, but is missing something. Like a smartphone without a headphone socket? Or a games console that can’t play UHD Blu Ray? What is it about the things that are missing that genders such fervour? Is it because those things that are missing represent a change? A change we are not willing to accept immediately? For as human beings we are so distrusting of change?
For months it had been speculated that a certain new smartphone will, or could be introduced without a 3.5mm headphone socket. A connection that has been ubiquitous for years. This connection allow us to listen to music using headphones, through various devices, without disturbing others. Transports us to another place. But, now Apple have unilaterally decided that it is not needed. Well, at least not on their phones.
But why is this news? Rather than make into a news story (surely more important things are happening in the world) can’t we just move on? Is this small, 3.5mm connector so important? Or is it because this is something that we are so used to, and it has been taken from us, without any consultation or for-warning? The news feeds play on the fact that removal of this small connection is a negative thing. But could something positive have been spun from this?
But, can it not be that if you want a phone with a headphone socket, then buy a phone with a headphone socket. There are plenty of them around. Or don’t upgrade to the new version. If you are happy to adapt to the change that would be required with the new phone, then go for it. This is not really news. This is not really worth the time and the coverage. Is it? Just like the new Sony PS4 Pro not being able to play UHD Blu Ray discs. Is this so important? This is not really worthy to be called news. But I guess in a 24/7 news culture there is a need to report on something. Whatever that something may be.
When you look at the reporting during the UK referendum on EU membership, there was some very irresponsible reporting. The majority of the newspapers and news channels took one aspect of the referendum, immigration, and made the whole referendum about this one issue. Membership of a body like the EU is more than just that. But rather than provide people with the facts and let them make up their own minds, news agencies pursued their own agendas. Moreover, agendas of the individuals owning these agencies. This is obviously no surprise, but there should be a better way. Right?
Shouldn’t journalism be trying to influence and educate, in a responsible way? And not direct the human conscious down a particular path. People (en masse) will generally consume whatever is fed them. People (as a collective) are stupid. But individuals are intelligent. The media should be talking to individuals, and not to the masses. Stop pandering to the lowest common denominator. Take responsibility to educate. Write as if you are talking to an intelligent human being. And not a group that will generate clicks and revenue. Give the individual a little credit. Treat them with some intelligence and respect. Give them the facts. Let them form an opinion. Let them form a conclusion. Let’s bring back some intelligent thought and constructive thinking back to our lives.