Twittering Fools

I’m not interested in what the public thinks. Nobody is—not even the public.

| January-February 2010

  • Fools on Twitter

    image by Grant Gilliland /

  • Fools on Twitter

Imagine this. You are driving along following a reasonably successful holiday—or at least a not-wholly-disastrous change of scene. To your unfolding amazement, the road is clear: no road “work” and no congestion. You have put aside your macro anxieties—war, climate change, U.K. tabloid queen Katie Price—and you are likewise enjoying rare psychological respite from those of a more personal nature: hair, weight, the staggering tedium of your life thus far.

You are not required to make any decisions, there are no strangers in view whom you find attractive, and there is nothing to spend your money on or to remind you that you haven’t got any. In other words, you are happy.

Thus, foolishly buoyed, you reach for the radio hoping for a program worth a sentient adult’s time, and the very first thing you hear is the presenter’s voice saying: “With regard to the global economy, Andy from Cheadle has e-mailed the program to say he thinks that . . .” Blocking the irritation, you switch stations. Another presenter with a different accent seems to be finishing a discussion about Israel and Palestine but, just as you settle back, she says: “Lindsay from Wrexham has texted in to say . . .”

Now the fury surges. Recklessly, you dial through as many stations as there are frequencies, but it’s always the same: “Sandy has gotten in touch to say that everyone knows Afghanistan is really all about . . .”; “Alison from Woodbridge has tweeted that she is in favor of vaccinations but that her doctor is on holiday so . . .”; “Nigel in Hyde is listening while he gets dressed and wonders why, when it comes to the polar ice caps, there can’t be more people like Jeremy Clarkson since . . .”

And so the rage takes full flame and your brief happiness is destroyed. As the traffic comes to a halt, you realize (once again) that you must either endure the misery of millions of atrociously ill-informed opinions or sit in a solitary silence that is filled only with a feverish internalized loathing for your fellow citizens. At home it is the same. All genres of television now contain an abysmal segment during which the anchor or host reads out a series of inane views from variously mad people with an inexplicable surplus of time and self-regard. And then reminds you that you can find more of the same at the commensurate website, on which you are urged to “join the debate” (debate!) with MilesofSmiles and MrLunchBox and Hg5Ylo and Gandalf.

Well, in my world, all of this would stop.

1/18/2010 4:37:18 AM

Have you noticed that we have more PHDs,more top economists, more doctors, more experts in every field. So if we have so many "experts," why are we in the mess that we are in? I know. Because experts really don't know any more than the average person and sometimes less. The reality is that our world is so complex; so immensely diverse, that there really is no such thing as an expert. We are all just trying to take the information that we have and get by and make sense of it all. The only difference between the average "expert," and the average person on the street, is that a street person's opinon will not cost you anything. The expert always has an ulterior motive--and it will always cost you.

1/16/2010 11:56:40 AM

indeed, CNN is the worst offender I've seen. Reading tweets is not journalism. The PBS Newshour is refreshingly free of this, but they don't have 24 hours to fill. the other comments miss the point - nobody is denying your right to an opinion, just understand that it's not inherently worth listening to. Expertise and informed analysis have irreplaceable value. The world is complicated, and statements about it that fit in 140 characters are necessarily simplistic.

Stephen Kastner_2
1/15/2010 1:38:06 PM

If it weren't for the fact that the "experts" have let us down so many times in the past decade, I might find some validity in your opinions. However, your nostalgic look into the aristocratic days of typewritten journalism is merely a sentimental yearning to undo the Internet and the power of populism coming alive with tools in hand. We are sick of the experts who failed to ask important questions like why we were invading Iraq or the most recent expert, the paid shill and notable economist, Jonathan Gruber. I'd rather listen to the multitude of voices and make my own opinions from this point forward. How ironic the ask for comments on an article that detests comments!

Facebook Instagram Twitter