Tuesday, March 28, 2006


The context of something is important. In any story, there are the basic things to know:
  • who
  • what
  • where
  • when
  • why
This is the context that frames any story, statement, or any data, for that matter. When a person says something, it's not meant to be etched in stone (unless actual masonry is involved). There have been lots of games in politics played since the age of mass media that all revolved around the notion of something being printed and having to be defended. The resulting rounds of word games have been quite the sport for a very long time.

Bill Clinton tried to use parsing to get his way out of an embarassing situation, and it backfired, big time. As a result we got our current administration... and I think we're all learning a painful lesson as a society as a result. Context is all important, word games don't cut it any more.

When appearances are all that matters, and there is no real attention being spent, you can get away with such matters. Once actual attention is being expended, lies and deceptions tend to dissolve into transparency. A mis-statement becomes far less damaging if actual human attention is involved in putting it all into context.

It is my belief that the whole web 2.0 thing is all about cutting through the crap, and actually paying attention to each other, and to things that really matter.

What you say may inconvinence you from now on, but it's not going to be the albitross it used to be. If you deal with it fairly in your blog, and keep the conversation about it open and honest and persistent, you can pretty much dig yourself out of any hole, no matter how big.

I'd be willing to bet that even Dan Quayle could get himself back into the public sphere as a viable candidate for President, if he blogged, and showed an open and intelligent side.

It's all about the context. Thank you for spending some of your time and attention reading this.


No comments: