The technology in our daily lives changes with time. Mostly it gets better (i.e. better cancer treatments, micro-brewed beer, and all sorts of awesome shit on the internet). Sometimes it gets worse (nearly mandatory automatic transmissions in American cars, those fucking CFL lights that never work, and the internet is spying on me).
One must adjust as well as they can; hoping to postpone the inevitable. Sooner or later I’ll wind up yelling at kids to get off the lawn and wishing I knew how to operate whatever is currently used as a phone but I intend to put that time as far into the future as I can. (After all I’m an Adaptable Curmudgeon.)
In this time, with current technology, I place greater trust in a video than I do some talking head on a news show. Maybe this is a generational thing? To me, the idea of believing what Walter Cronkite said on the TV because he’s Walter Cronkite and because he’s on TV is madness. It wasn’t to my elders. Skepticism must be learned and it must be calibrated to the environment.
Which brings us to video. We all know it can or will be hacked in the near future. Like this:
None of us are immune to believing a video of a politician saying something. Why? I have no idea. As a kid I saw videos of Godzilla stomping all over Tokyo. My kid has seen far more convincing videos of 200′ tall monsters fighting Thor in the middle of New York City. Why we’d think a video of Trump or Nanci Pelosi is more trustworthy than one of Thor sucker punching a flying alien is a bit of a mystery in human nature.
We will have to learn to be cautious; and we certainly will. I foresee a few unfortunate witch hunts as we get the hang of it but that is the nature of life. Don’t worry though. This has happened before. I present a few photos from 1920 that were totally true and believable… in 1920:
It’s not that people in 1920 were primitive screwheads and gullible nitwits, it’s that photography was still in it’s infancy and… OK there’s a certain amount of gullible involved. But don’t be surprised when a video emerges of Trump or Putin saying something radioactive and no amount of contrary evidence sways a populace that buys it hook line and sinker. We’ve all been warned.
Thank you, and stay woke bitches.
Governments, especially WESTERN governments, have had the technology to do this for quite a few years now. At this point in time, “Law Enforcement” has the capability to create whatever they want out of thin air. If you are ever on a jury, please do not be stupid enough to believe video or photographic “evidence” provided by “Law Enforcement” unless the defense agrees that what’s show accurately depicts reality. After all, best estimate is that between 25% to 50% of evidence and testimony provided in court by “Law Enforcement” is “testilying”. Or what for Mere Citizens would be called perjury. And guess which way that “testilying” usually goes…
Is this technology Trump’s excuse for being such a (fill in w/any insulting noun) on camera?
Oh heck no. As far as I can tell Trump is exactly who he is and the camera is showing exactly what’s in front of it. I don’t think there’s much that’s fake about Trump’s on camera. Now if he starts acting differently then watch out. If he’s taped doing differential calculus or gets too chicken to say “Islamic” before the word terrorism then I’d start checking for realtime edits.