I read a lot of things you know. Blogs, web-sites, books, magazines, periodicals and of course newspapers.
I’ve been aware of newspapers, but funnily enough I only took them seriously when I began my paper round. I was of course reading well before then, you know from growing with the comics especially Asterix and Tintin. I was picking up some biographies and history of football clubs as well, so my reading variety was growing all the time. So when I came across the newspapers it was more reading material for me.
Without any sense of political nous, I was aware that the material I was reading in the papers to a large degree had to be taken with a pinch of salt. That is to say, the papers obviously had a mandate greater than factual account of events. As I grew up and studied them more carefully becoming aware of editorial agendas and newspaper steers it became al the more careful of what I read.
When I was younger and a bit less conscious I’d mess about reading some of the tabloids, obviously because their sports section had great football coverage. Yet I was becoming more aware that the quality and standard of impartiality and fact finding in each article was not a priority. Am I suggesting that the press resorts to deception and mis-truths? Actually, no. I’m suggesting that the perspective that drives the papers adjusts what version of the ‘fact’s they produce. If you’re not careful and constructively critical then you’re liable to be influenced by that which is not completely true.
That kind of wary reading when it comes to media is all well and good. It becomes even sadder, however, when that reading has to extend to books as well. Tomes of great reference and awe, have to be taken carefully. After all the questions still have to be asked – how do you kno where you’re source is coming from? How do you know it’s true?
I have been reading a Paul McCartney biography of late and such is the liberty taken by the writer to create the thinking behind Paul’s lifestyle it’s a wonder that it’s not seen as the true account of Paul’s life. Yet theses quotes and belief that is raised is also biased against looking at Paul as a fully rounded and mature person. I found that all interesting, especially seeing as though I had previously read a biography on McCartney that was a lot more sympathetic to his character.
I appreciate the pressure of relativism and the desire to have it that there are many different sides to the truth, but I like reading material on whatever format that is wholeheartedly devoted to the quest for truth, not speculation or theorising on one’s own feelings or thoughts. I admire creative impassioned writing and I don’t believe in perfect impartiality and objectivity outside of God, so I’m not looking for the removal of the individual’s voice, but what I don’t like is when the personal agenda overrides aspiring to something beyond.
Yet I recognise as well that even on this here blog, there are things I have written that fall foul of that standard. I acknowledge that sometimes my own prejudices leave me in an untenable position. My desire though is to aspire to something better, something beyond …
All to say you cannot believe everything you read. Reading with the heart and mind of discernment is so critical to healthy reading.
Be careful.
For His Name’s Sake
Shalom
dmcd
Life With CD 