curious questions of life made my column in the newspaper ceased publication, but now that we have the approval of the "new administration" we're back.
This text will be published tomorrow in The Truth of Yucatan, but the step over here for the guys:
must refer
Wikileaks:
Wikileaks:
filter what I want ... and I buy it
For Neftali Hernandez Zetina
For Neftali Hernandez Zetina
Wikileaks reveals new information "transcendental & rdquo on U.S. diplomacy, which puts the public eye the vision of the great American power over its allies and antagonists.
The "revelations" this time to contain the opinion highlights unerring various international political figures, for example, for Americans Vladimir Putin, Russian Prime Minister is a person a male, authoritarian and not able to control democracy German Chancellor Angela Merkel sees a gray person to not risk having any insurance to act.
Is this really an informative fact? The fact that a government has secret reports and diplomatic & aacute; ticos about their interests has no relevance, is something we all do even the most personal areas. Where is the significance? Easy: Wikileaks shows to know that people enjoy "believe informed."
With these data disclosed by the agency "without profit", people has been frantic for reading the great revelations, given for correct and accepted without question. Never mind that data on this occasion, are general views, PERSONAL and characteristic of the diplomatic team confidence.
People feel they are "cool", vand welcome to an "alternative means" powerful country faces the North and will "win" a play by putting in the public eye specific information. Wikileaks knows it and it sells, without measuring positive or negative consequences that will create benefits for its target media. And people, critical impulse of those who disclose information in traditional media, it falls to the brightness of a data "curious" is left to buy for the novelty without actually having a real concept, and weighed on the information you just know.
positive reaction and applauded by society is what for me is desdeñable. How can you give for something real you just saw? Every day, people rap destroys what a reporter, broadcaster or "professional" media comments in newspaper or electronic media, where is the critical sense that claim to have? Is it the sheer pleasure?
The act of placing a symbol of freedom of expression, the disclosure of official documents, in a way sensitive and focused on half as sensitive as diplomacy, to me is a form of praise to debauchery information . Such alternative means not looking the stroke information is constantly b &, Desktop search, Search for popular taste remain simple, based on revelation "staggering" with no real objective and informative.
I see with great suspicion because such cases, reiterating, prove to be very little information since, in contrast to an investigation, Wikileaks does not seek to create an independent opinion in society that reads your documents, you find that you to create exactly what they "reveal" what they see who that society as a triumph of freedom, although this will take advantage of the naivety of the two.
Well, that's my opinion sacrosanct. Short but straight to what I think.
Greetings.
0 comments:
Post a Comment