The Internet and Beyond

Howard Lee, Today Online 21 Apr 08;

Smugly, my brother-in-law sent me a YouTube link of a BBC documentary, debunking the environmental doom-sayers. Dutifully, I went online. Yes, it was a critique on Al Gore's much-touted An Inconvenient Truth. But, because I am a self-proclaimed tree-hugger, I immediately Googled for the antithesis to this conspiracy theory.

But while a seed of doubt has been planted, I cling to my take on global warming. I am also aware that my brother-in-law is no lumberjack, but he has probably watched one too many episodes of Mythbusters and enjoys the scientific deconstruction of everything.

But what strikes me about our exchange is how the Internet has become the centre in our quest for knowledge, and that with a click of a mouse, it provides us with opposite views of a belief.

And that piece of reality is a far cry from Low Chee Kong's article "PM Lee on Internet lessons" (April 14), which suggests that the Internet today has been used to propagate information that does not give due consideration to the political motivations of those who disseminate them.

Such a preposition forwards two assumptions: First, that information available online is more skewed towards one particular ideal or agenda, compared to non-online media. And second, that the key problem of such a bias is that readers will believe whole-heartedly with the agenda proposed.

Superficially, the first assumption holds true. Writers are human, subject to their own biases, and online, short attention spans do not take kindly to dual analyses. A writer makes his point as quickly as possible, and usually that which is of the greatest concern to him. The Internet hosts a variety of views that are often one-sided in coverage. But, the Internet must be viewed in the larger scheme of things. It is full of opinions, some in direct contradiction to each other.

This brings us to the second assumption. We too often assume that the information we see online is taken in whole by its audience. In reality, readers often engage in a selective process of accepting or denying the information they consume. This is influenced by pre-conceived ideas of what the information is about, and the beliefs and concerns they have when reading it.

A case in point is the recent Malaysian elections. While it is easy to assume that Malaysiakini played a big part in turning votes against the ruling party, the truth is that voters saw a connection between what they experience in life and what was written online. No amount of virtual cajoling could have convinced them.

More often than not, online readers find an easy connection with what they read, or choose to search to read. In fact, with the diversity of opinions on the Internet, the bigger worry is not those who have a reason to seek out and find affirmation with information that they already believe in. Rather, it is those who have yet to decide which side they want to take that should concern us.

The writer is a PR practitioner.