Context

When interest groups push an agenda, they peddle narratives that dumb down discussions of complex issues. They deliberately do that because by making things black and white, they can easily sway and influence people to support their causes.

With the emergence of social media, they now find it a lot easier to disseminate oversimplified and stripped-down ideas. If they target the masses, they can expose them to populist beliefs through manipulative rhetoric. If they address the youth and the intellectual elite, they take advantage of their idealism by appealing to their emotions, deceptively empowering them to pool together their resources against perceived enemies in the guise of this good-versus-evil crusade.

This is why even the educated ones are tricked into abandoning context and nuance. Even they no longer listen to reason. They live in their own ideological if not outright partisan echo chamber, refusing to acknowledge opposing views. Meanwhile, the poor remain in the dark, being fed with deceptive lies that are meant to reinforce their skepticism towards traditional political institutions and established power structures.

This is why we are drawn to influencers who, with their streamlined narrative,s buttress our held biases. We do not prefer content creators who objectively tell it like it is. In our political landscape, for example, it’s either they are true blue Kapinks or DDS through and through. No in-between. And because social media is addictive, we find smart people who abandon their principles and appear dumb and stupid in the name of engagement. They resort to theatrics to invite attention.

As a consequence, we lose sight of context and shades, which are critical components of ferreting out the truth. Every time there is a controversial issue, we no longer dig deeper but conveniently accept any opinion that reinforces our take on the matter, if not our blatant prejudice. We prefer sensationalism over fairness and impartiality.

I remember when a student committed suicide some few months ago, we automatically blamed the teacher who flunked him instead of understanding the psychological dynamics of suicide and why some people commit it. Clearly, there’s more to it than meets the eye. But that doesn’t matter anymore as we have grown accustomed to dumbing things down.

When a comedian friend was gunned down at his own show, some people were quick to point out that he deserved it because his comedy is offensive instead of using it as an opportunity to discuss how the concept of free speech has evolved through the years and what we can do to protect it as the very embodiment of democracy. For clearly, there’s a reason why it stands on a higher plain than other substantive human rights.

We have practically become lazy that we dismiss alternative and opposing ideas and in the process become easy prey for political maneuverings. The other day, the issue of whether former President Duterte should be granted interim release was a hotly contested topic. Those lawyers who obviously abhor him said he deserves to remain in jail and arrogantly declared he would wreak havoc once released.

Those who support him, meanwhile, said he should be released because he is innocent and therefore a mere victim of political persecution. None of them incidentally discussed the nature of an interim release and the grounds upon which it may be granted or denied. That is, despite their knowledge of the law.

Kaya ang daming bobo!