Newspapers that dealt in sensationalism and outright lies were placed in supermarket checkout aisles, even though they were fit only for the bottoms of bird cages and litter boxes. Supermarket owners evidently believed people would be hooked on them or why else why would they put them there?
No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the public H. L. Mencken 1880-1956 (Also the years that saw the greatest transformation of some newspapers from broadsides and muck rakers to reliable sources of information. Recent decades have reduced their numbers but there still are a few with professional standards.)
I have no difficulty in not assuming that something I see on the net must be true. I’m a librarian: I learned that about books and other print matter long, long ago.Also, a good speaker can make nearly anything sound good and reasonable an right. My father’s contention was that political speeches should not be allowed; rather, everything should be printed out for people to read. Sounds good to me, and I still wouldn’t believe most of it.
Jef Mallett’s Blog Post Frazz15 hrs · When Whitfield and Strong wrote that, we didn’t have deepfakes and Photoshop and other convincing computer-generated imagery, so we may have to adjust the ratio. Or maybe not. P.T. Barnum could sew half a monkey to half a fish and convince an awful lot of folks they saw a mermaid. So maybe the ratio is about the same while the material has shifted a little. Not to mess with one of the best songs ever written, but you should probably increase the ratio to believe half of what you hear as well. That sounds like license, but it actually makes things harder because it involves critical thinking and a decision, and a lot of us don’t much care for that.
There are things you can do to narrow it down. For starters, it will surprise no one to learn I’ve always been a big believer in the Question Authority ethic. Question doesn’t mean automatically reject, but it most certainly means question. Equally deserving of our cynicism is anything stated in an argument. Same qualifier: Question. Don’t reject outright, but definitely question. My observation is that people generally get into arguments to win them, and as in any contest, the more it heats up, the more the contestants will do, or say, or, hell, believe whatever it takes to win. You don’t hear too many people who claim to love a good argument talk about any that changed their minds.
Although, it is true that there still are a few like Jeff Bridges in his first-class role and that classic sound bite:
mddshubby2005 almost 5 years ago
And if you read it on the internet? Little hope there…
Bilan almost 5 years ago
To continue with what Marvin Gaye sang:
♬ But I can’t help bein’ confused ♬
Nachikethass almost 5 years ago
When I was young, I used to believe what I read in the newspapers.
LeftCoastKen Premium Member almost 5 years ago
If you read it you saw it, no? So which half of it should believe?
jpayne4040 almost 5 years ago
Nowadays, even reading information is a bit dubious. Even more so if it’s on the internet.
Pipe Tobacco almost 5 years ago
Excellent comic today!
donaldhellis almost 5 years ago
There was a time when you could……..
Carl Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Because Photoshop and Deep Fakes aren’t real.
DiminishedFirst almost 5 years ago
I prefer this: “Don’t believe everything that you hear, but try to believe everything that you say.”
Bill Löhr Premium Member almost 5 years ago
" Believe nothing that you hear"—rather cynical for a building full of classrooms.
sandpiper almost 5 years ago
Newspapers that dealt in sensationalism and outright lies were placed in supermarket checkout aisles, even though they were fit only for the bottoms of bird cages and litter boxes. Supermarket owners evidently believed people would be hooked on them or why else why would they put them there?
No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the public H. L. Mencken 1880-1956 (Also the years that saw the greatest transformation of some newspapers from broadsides and muck rakers to reliable sources of information. Recent decades have reduced their numbers but there still are a few with professional standards.)
Mugens Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Nice to see props given to the old Motown songwriters.
atajayhawk almost 5 years ago
I have no difficulty in not assuming that something I see on the net must be true. I’m a librarian: I learned that about books and other print matter long, long ago.Also, a good speaker can make nearly anything sound good and reasonable an right. My father’s contention was that political speeches should not be allowed; rather, everything should be printed out for people to read. Sounds good to me, and I still wouldn’t believe most of it.
Richard S Russell Premium Member almost 5 years ago
“Trust, but verify”
The Brooklyn Accent Premium Member almost 5 years ago
I never actually heard any people say “Believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear,” unless they were quoting that song.
COOLGARY almost 5 years ago
Folks they are talking about the song: I heard it through the grapevine.
Stephen Gilberg almost 5 years ago
Edgar Allan Poe said it before any of those guys, in “The System of Dr. Tarr and Prof. Fether.”
Not the Smartest Man On the Planet -- Maybe Close Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Nice shout-out to the songwriters.
waltermatera almost 5 years ago
When I was young there was no Internet to scoff at.
AdultComicFan almost 5 years ago
Anymore?
Dgwphotos almost 5 years ago
The long version by CCR, best version EVER!
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] almost 5 years ago
Jef Mallett’s Blog Post Frazz15 hrs · When Whitfield and Strong wrote that, we didn’t have deepfakes and Photoshop and other convincing computer-generated imagery, so we may have to adjust the ratio. Or maybe not. P.T. Barnum could sew half a monkey to half a fish and convince an awful lot of folks they saw a mermaid. So maybe the ratio is about the same while the material has shifted a little. Not to mess with one of the best songs ever written, but you should probably increase the ratio to believe half of what you hear as well. That sounds like license, but it actually makes things harder because it involves critical thinking and a decision, and a lot of us don’t much care for that.
There are things you can do to narrow it down. For starters, it will surprise no one to learn I’ve always been a big believer in the Question Authority ethic. Question doesn’t mean automatically reject, but it most certainly means question. Equally deserving of our cynicism is anything stated in an argument. Same qualifier: Question. Don’t reject outright, but definitely question. My observation is that people generally get into arguments to win them, and as in any contest, the more it heats up, the more the contestants will do, or say, or, hell, believe whatever it takes to win. You don’t hear too many people who claim to love a good argument talk about any that changed their minds.
Although, it is true that there still are a few like Jeff Bridges in his first-class role and that classic sound bite:
“Am I right? Am I right?”
“You’re not wrong, man. You’re just an … “
While some pedants will seize
on my slight liberties
I just did what a poet must do
and I’ll twist one more quote
to defend what I wrote:
“Is it accurate?” “No, but it’s true.”
Believe what rhymes, man. Believe what rhymes.