I’ve alluded to, but never truly speculated on what might happen if what I coined the “media bubble” pops. What if the thing I tried to promote toward not bursting, does anyway? What is the potential fall-out?

As a refresher for those who’ve not read my articles on the deluge of media we get in the modern day, I will summarize about a thousand words of thought: we get so many forms of entertainment that companies market hard just to keep you from flitting to another company—and cause some long-term problematic issues consequently to do so. And with the addition of things like YouTube and SoundCloud and Amazon’s CreateSpace making it easier to add to that mass of entertainment, it’s impossible for one person to enjoy everything they have an interest in nowadays.

So, what might happen if this does come to a head? What might occur if the number of creations get so monumental that it somehow breaks the system? Answer: a bunch of media people will be out of a job.  To even attempt and keep up with the media, people would have to devote most their time on it—which isn’t feasible for sustained personal economic stability. So, they should stop watching.  And without that viewership, hundreds of smaller and even some larger media companies will fall out of life.

This outcome puts a lot, a lot, of people out of jobs, which would cause such a flux it would be hard to grasp what all those people could do in the aftermath. Tons of individuals qualified to make professional media or similar would filter back into the rest of the workforce, and the workforce might not be able to take it. I don’t care how many open positions Clearwater Mall’s shops need, or how many more retail buildings we could build downtown, it’s not nearly enough. The world does not have enough space for all of that. An entire industry dying is not short-term positive.

Now, I am not a scientist, social scientist, or economist, so I can’t say what the exact outcome would be, but it would certainly be like shuffling a massive deck of cards made of the world’s economy. 

But here’s the kicker. If media does blow up and become staggered and crashed, and there are no more media creators but a few: the bubble will inflate again. Just will. The supply will fall below the demand again, and people will step in to fill the gap.

I don’t promote letting any of this happen, but the cycle might be so ingrained now it can’t escape its own gravity: bubbles inflating if one ever pops. And we will, for the rest of the human experience, have this as an occurrence and a balance we need to keep healthy. Or else we kind of promote a serious negative upheaval.

But, that’s just one man’s speculation. We do have a bubble, that much is for sure—and I don’t want to know what happens if it pops. I do not promote getting to see it outside of perhaps a dystopian novel or movie.

---
If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com  

As a person who writes a lot of articles, with a lot of opinions in them, I must promote that counterarguments to my opinions have their validity—at least for my more subjective and biased statements in the realms of sociological and political ideas.  

As you may know from reading my articles, I am a proponent of technology. I promote many things futuristic and technological. An entire four-part article series by me helps lay out some of my opinions on humanity’s future. But, that doesn’t mean someone doesn’t have a good counterargument to my opinions. Those who promote the stopping of certain advancements and careful control of certain aspects have their points. And nowhere are those sorts of points more effectively laid out than in the genres of science fiction and dystopian fiction.

And that’s where Black Mirror comes into the picture. A series currently on Netflix from over the pond that is, as many others pointed out before me, like a modern-day Twilight Zone. And, if you are of a nerdy persuasion, I don’t need to tell you why that is an interesting and enticing comparison.

Now, what is a black mirror, I hear you ask? Why is that the show’s name? Well, it fits right into the theme of the series. Black Mirror looks at various versions of our future either immediate or a bit far flung out (I haven’t seen every episode yet, so there may be exceptions) and shows how things can go wrong. But not in the more extreme ways of Hunger Games or Brave New World—instead much more close to home. These are likely worlds. Feasible in the next decade to century.

So, let’s get back around to the question: what’s a black mirror? Well, turn off the computer or phone you are reading this on, and it will stare right back at you. A little mirror screen making the reflection tinged dark. That’s a black mirror. Pay attention as you peruse Clearwater, standing in line at the doctors, in the grocery store, or a quiet dinner at P.F. Chang’s in Countryside, and find the people not talking and looking down or standing eerily still with nothing but their thumbs and palms moving, and you will see many people holding a mirror to themselves—and to society.

Now, as you can probably guess, this show and its stories are not for the faint of heart. If I am going to promote you watch it (and that is what I am doing right now) I must warn that this is an adult show. Do not let kids under thirteen, at least, get an eyeful. Beyond swearing, Black Mirror goes into places an adult will be uncomfortable with, and though the messages this show states are exactly the sort of lessons a kid in this modern world should, and perhaps must, learn, it’s a bit more intense than one might assume. Haunting even, in certain cases.

But, again, I do think you should watch this show. I think it might be required viewing for all owners of a computer or phone or a tablet device. I promote the technological future promised by the hopefuls of the science fiction community, but as I said at the beginning of the article: I am open to a well-reasoned counterargument. And when said counterargument is in a pretty package like this, with top-notch acting and superb “showing not telling” writing, I must concede that the future has the capacity to not be as rosy-tinted as I like to think. At least, not if we don’t learn from the projected outcomes thought up in stories and shows like this.

But, at least, unlike the characters, we do get the chance to think of it ahead of time.  

---
If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com  

Mudslinging is a part of the way politicians go about advertising. It just is. I am not a fan of the practice, but it is how America works right now. But, the election is over, and the president-elect chosen, so why is the hostility still at a fever pitch?

Why is political discourse at such an all-time rage? It’s like a rowdy sports game crowd around here lately.

Now, you could blame Trump. He does have a habit of saying things which anger and offend others, and you could argue that he sets an example, and thus we are more hateful than ever—or at least, the more hateful feel free to express their hate.

But, I’d argue that’s not the main reason. Not the advertising. Not the mudslinging. Not the rhetoric. Again, that happens all the time. Political figures have been trying to yank their opponents off their high-horses for centuries. And even people saying horrific things about minorities is not a new concept in politics. We had elections back during the time of slavery, so it’s not like modern day is going to be more offensive and wrong than that.

So, then, why are we all so angry at each other? Well, there’s a few easy culprits. One is social media. Yep, social media. Who doesn’t have a person or two who spouts political something or other related to the side you don’t like? Now, I’m all for popping the echo chambers of the world and making everyone look at each other as people, and accept other’s rights to differing political opinions. But, I’d much rather have that kind of discussion over a peaceful cup of tea or coffee at the Starbucks on Cleveland Street, or Gulf to Bay, or in Clearwater Mall (there are a lot of them to choose from), than on the internet where anyone can jump in with a shouting, venomous comment.

As a writer, I do stand by the value of the written word, but tweets and hashtags and memes are not the best forms of communication, and the lack of a real person in front of your face makes it much easier to blow up and be more and more aggressive.  

Another culprit is (say it with me now) the news. Every news channel, comedy news show, talk show, or even skit show seems to have such a heavy bias which they hammer on to the point it riles people. I am not labeling comedy, or satire, as a bad thing, but these shows are so set to one mindset with so little lee-way—and we expose ourselves to it so much—that we can’t help but find ourselves riled up by media intended to entertain and draw viewers.        

It’s a systemic problem. The news, annoyingly, is like any normal television show in relying on view count, and, thus, becomes ruthless and rampant in spreading inflammatory statements. Neither censorship, nor “neutering” the facts, is a good solution to this, but if we continue with angry media, we get angry people.

If we calmed it down, we might get somewhere. I believe we, as a species, are capable of logical discussion without screaming or name-calling. I think we can, with some effort, be rational people even when talking about deeply controversial things. We need to make a stronger effort to resist kneejerk reactions.

And, as to the mudslinging in political advertising, well...that might take a little longer to remove. But, like any desired change, we can get there—one step at a time.

---
If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com   

Not the first time I’ve addressed this. Not the first time I’ve looked at the overabundance of media—or how marketing keeps it going along. But this is the first time (I think) I’ve addressed this topic on how it has a detrimental effect on culture.

Now, before I begin, let me say that everyone consuming art—especially with how good the art has been lately—is not a bad thing on its own merits. The public discourse of consumer fiction is at an all-time high, at least if you take the internet into account. Intelligent discussion of media is rampant and in-depth.

But, that doesn’t mean we aren’t getting some issues here. The biggest is the supply glut: how much sheer stuff is coming out for entertainment. If humanity did not need to make money, or produce (how terrible a society that would be) then maybe, maybe, a person could take the time needed to go through all the media which they have an interest in—but I doubt it. That would require someone to not even interact with the outside world. Not a breath of fresh air. Clearwater beach would be empty, and Clearwater proper would be a barren wasteland in this hypothetical situation. It may as well be a full-time job.

In fact, some people have made it their full-time job. But that doesn’t address the problem here for everyone else. Marketing, advertising, our entire economy, relies on people producing, and so we hit this desperate cycle.

Let me explain. People only possess so much time (obviously) and thus only watch a few shows, video, movies, etc. The media market, however, can’t survive without viewers. So, they do everything they can to make you pay attention to them and preferably only them. An attention war. And the weapons are often either making things shorter and shorter (thus more easy to commit to) or better and better quality.

Say what you want about the “free market,” but at least in the media arm’s race, the system works too well. Humanity’s inundated with media which is so eyeball demanding that one desires, no: craves, to watch it all. Media has become a social necessity; the main way people seem to hang out with each other. And with the political environment and the rest of the world being the way it is, art is also the only safe thing—it seems sometimes—to talk about without massive heated arguments. And even that does not always work.    

I’ve alluded to a bubble popping in another article, which I still stand by if this trend continues. But when it does pop, I have no idea what the outcome will be. Media is now a good chunk of our reality—at least among the “First World” countries. And when it becomes too much, so large it causes apathy in someone seeking entertainment (which may already be happening) I don’t think humanity will let go. Instead, we might need to embrace this future even further.

And in that sense, I guess the marketing worked better than expected.

---
If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com   

A few days ago, I wrote an article with no knowledge of the person I was addressing. I congratulated the new president of the United States. I stand by that article, still.

But I am shocked. I did not see the election going the way it did. All that talk about there being some media bias was true. Because the news channels I watched seemed to do a collective double-take as the night went on into the next day. Around eleven, Eastern Standard Time, Florida time, everyone knew how it would play out, Trump trumping.

There was still some swinging left for a little while, but as I was still awake at 4 a.m., I sat in stunned silence as the confirmation was, well, confirmed. I woke up to so much input and congratulations and fear and outrage and... wow.

Let me get a little personal, which is not something I usually do. I am from (though not born in) Chicago, Illinois. A vastly Democrat state. I have a lot of friends and most of my family in that state—and some, perhaps all, wanted Hillary. My opinions on who I wanted were mixed enough I did not side, but I expected her to win. Even after talking with quite a few Republicans here in Clearwater.  

But, well, you know the score. And I am still numb, curious to see what’s about to happen. What will happen. Regardless of President Trump’s actual official actions going forward, he did promote some unacceptable views and opinions of minorities and women.

And I hope, as the president, he does not do that anymore. I hope he did it to just draw attention. And now plans to give people the honor and respect and empathy that the president should to all Americans, regardless of race and gender and sexuality.

And some seem to think so, because they are happy with him.  I watch my social media fill with cheer. Though, at the same time, I watch the YouTube community—which at least from what I’ve observed is more pro-Hillary—all grow ever angrier at the prospect. Or despaired. Or incensed about the Electoral College deciding this one.

And, I guess, in the wake of it, I have only a few things to say, to promote. To tell Clearwater citizens, and all people who may find this article floating in the internet’s stream, to stay calm. Don’t divide so hard on each other. Understand about half of the country you live in wanted this to happen. That’s our government, and I know it can feel awful sometimes, but it runs the way it runs. Say what you wish about the Electoral College, but it’s the current system set in place to decide our new leader.

You can promote change, people always do. We should. Until we have a perfect world. And that doesn’t stop just because someone else became president than who you thought would.

I say this tentatively, aware my words may become a harsh echo in the next four years, but I think we’ll be okay. We still have a say in what happens to our country. He is only one-third of the political checks and balances. We can still make things better.

And maybe he will make things better. Every president is a new chance for something that we never expected.

Promote hope. Promote tolerance. Promote not giving in to fear and outrage and all the other dark emotions stirred in this first week.

That’s the best thing we can do.

---
If you liked this article, you can read more of Brandon Scott’s work over at The Hive, or on his website: www.coolerbs.com