Objective Entertainment?

Yesterday, I inadvertently touched on one of my own raw nerves when I said this about blogging:

....no one pays me to do this, right? And if they did pay me to do it, I would quit, right? My oh-so-sacrosanct artistic integrity would be compromised if I took money, unless there were truly no strings attached. But money is a string, and so are readers, which means that whether I'm paid or not, what I say is influenced by the public nature of this blog, and the identifiable nature of my persona, which is not anonymous. Thus there's no escaping the fact of inherently compromised integrity.
This didn't go far enough, and while it is a recurrent subject, I'm realizing that I failed to address the complexities of what I'll call the entertainment factor.

There are millions and millions of people doing exactly what I am doing, which is self publishing for little or no money, in a highly competitive environment. Normally, when we think of "bias," we think in terms of politics, especially particular opinions and positions on issues. With bloggers, this is usually transparent. What you see is what you get. I'm biased in favor of my opinions, and while I like to explain them, there's no denying that I have them. The type of bias that rises to the blog scandal level is bias which is undisclosed, hidden, or denied -- and which, if known, would materially affect the blogger's credibility. A classic example would be a blogger secretly taking money from Wal-Mart who spends most of his time defending Wal-Mart, or a blogger in the employ of a candidate who defends that candidate or attacks his opponent.

But what about all the bloggers, and all the purveyors of online opinion who just want to be noticed? Before we even get to their positions on issues, isn't the fact that they're desperate to be noticed relevant?

The reason I say this is because of a phenomenon I've run into more times than I could hope to estimate. Typically, I'll read someone's online column, and before I realize what is happening, I'll find myself getting worked into a lather over things like whether he's gotten the facts right and whether I agree or disagree with his thoughts and opinions. But then I'll get down to the bottom of the column and I'll see what amounts to a resumé -- usually a boastful description about positions and accomplishments followed by information on how to arrange radio and television interviews.

Regardless of whether his position might be biased, doesn't that indicate another type of bias? The opinion purveyor is, simply, on the hustle! He is doing more than offering opinions, even more than trying to influence public policy; he wants to be a celebrity.

In a word, an entertainer.

I discussed this in several posts about Ann Coulter, because I think she's done it so well that she can be considered a master of Opinion Entertainment.

But I'm wondering -- just wondering -- does the desire to be an entertainer affect objectivity? It's a different question than ordinary bias. Sure, someone like Ann Coulter is biased, but the more I see scholars -- even stodgy think-tankers previously regarded as thoughtful people -- promoting downright nutty ideas, the more I wonder, are they just plain getting hungrier? And is it getting harder and harder to be heard through the din?

I'm sure I'm as guilty as anyone, but I think this is becoming so endemic that if you're in the online opinion business it's almost de rigueur. So much so, that last year when I stumbled upon the fictitious nature of "George Harleigh," the guy who quoted "Harleigh" (at least, one of his sockpuppets) went on the offensive against me -- and he seemed to think I was hiding something:

I decided to do a little background checking of my own on Eric Scheie, the blogger who claims he "outed" this situation. I find it odd that someone who demands so much disclosue from others doesn't include a link to any information about himself on his own blog. Make me wonder what he has to hide.
Regular readers know that while I don't talk about my life all that much (it strikes me as egotistical) that nevertheless there's a ton of personal information about me in here that's accumulated over the years. But it's true; I never bothered with one of the "ABOUT ME" thingies. Part of it's that I'm too lazy, and it seems like an administrative hassle. Part of it is that I don't like looking like a celebrity wannabe. Hell I could and maybe should quote what the best bloggers in the business have said about me, and I could even say "CLASSICAL VALUES -- AS FEATURED ON CNN!" or "CLASSICAL VALUES -- LEADING GOOGLE VALUES SITE SINCE 753 BC!" With a big beaming picture of me in a stylish suit, and a toll free number of some phony "appointment secretary" to call.

The fact is, so many people do that nowadays that not doing it can be seen as abnormal.

Again, is the purpose of all of this entertainment?

Can entertainment-based opinion be called truly objective? Or is that the right word? Can Ann Coulter be described as more "objective" than, say, Andy Warhol?

If the desire to entertain people is in fact a form of bias that can affect objectivity (albeit in a different manner than ordinary bias) then why is it so often overlooked?

Because everybody else is doing it, so we're on the same playing field?

Does objectivity suffer the more the field grows? Or am I in too much of a conflict of interest to even care simply because I do this?

I need not worry for long, though. Because this post -- like all posts -- will simply be placed in line and it's entertainment value will diminish quite rapidly.

Somehow I find that comforting. There's something incredibly cool about being able to share a dirty little secret with the entire world. What's incredibly comforting is knowing that even if it matters now, it doesn't really matter for very long. Writing a post like this is, in a certain way, like taking advantage of a hidden loophole. It's almost as if I never told a soul.

(That may represent a hidden and undisclosed form of entertainment, but I won't go there.)

posted by Eric on 02.25.07 at 10:43 AM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/4669






Comments

What effect does this bias have on one's writing?

More extreme? More snarky? Shallower? Deeper? More dirt, less substance? More ad hominem (because we all know what it is, but it's also flashy)?

One of the reasons I'm on a blogging hiatus ("quit blogging" sounds so final) is that I found I had very little to say other than snark and fisking. That does have entertainment value, but it doesn't really mean anything. Anyone who cannot see that an article is fiskable is not going to be convinced of its idiocy by my, and I dare say anyone's, fisking of it.

mrsizer   ·  February 26, 2007 08:25 PM

Thanks for the comment! The entertainment effect might be more rudeness for some people, but I'm not entirely sure what the effect is for me, which is why I wrote the post. I try not to let it affect me, but there's no denying it's there. This is supposed to be fun, but I sometimes feel pressure to take myself seriously, and to the extent that the pressure comes from me, I try to uproot it and destroy it.

I can't allow occasional feelings of burnout to stop me from blogging, because it's a daily exercise like running and pushups, so I post even if it feels just absolutely awful. I have found there's no correlation between how I feel and whether people like it. There are no rules, and it's all so fleeting. Each post just fades away to taking up disk space somewhere, and pretty soon you realize that what you said is millions of words. And you just keep right on saying them. The tank grows bigger, and the fish have to be fed constantly.

Eric Scheie   ·  February 26, 2007 08:48 PM

Post a comment

You may use basic HTML for formatting.





Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)



March 2007
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits