I think what makes great science fiction isn't the universe, it's the concept behind it. Of course, you can argue that this is what distinguishes short stories (which tend to be much more concept-oriented) from novels (which need to develop deeper characters, unless you can figure out a device like Asimov used in Foundation to get away with shallow character development). Still, I can think back on the great science fiction I've read, and most of it is really about the ideas, not about the universe.
After all, most sci-fi universes are just our own universe with something changed - a more complicated version of a Sliders episode. If everything were actually different, we'd have no reference point and it wouldn't mean anything. It's the fact that almost everything is the same except for some crucial difference (more advanced technology, or the Nazis winning WW2, etc.) that makes the stories compelling. That's why so many of these stories include some kind of foil character that the reader can identify with (Arthur Dent is a good example of this, but literally almost every single sci-fi book ever written contains at least one main character that is strikingly similar to people contemporary to the author's own culture). The story can often be created simply by allowing the contemporary typical person to clash with the changes introduced in the universe.
The real problem here is not the actions of Pinkerton which - though appalling - can only be expected of a corporation in an economy that thrives in large part on misleading or out-of-proportion marketing. The problem is the media which propogates the misleading information to the public - a public which, in large, seems to take to heart almost everything they see in the media.
I recall last year, during the events at Columbine, when I closely followed the Drudge Report. It is an admittedly sesnationalist news source, but it has its advantages in that it is sensationalist across the board - it will provide links to every source of sensationalist reporting.
What struck me most about the links I found on the Drudge Report is that, given the enormous volume (at least 30) of different news articles it listed regarding Columbine, almost every single article was reporting different "facts" about the story. Most notable, of course, is that until the day after the events, almost every media source in the country was listing a death toll of "at least 25". There is nothing the media likes more than an enormous number of murders to report, presumably because they assume that the number of people who take in their media is directly proportional to the scale of the tragedy being reported. Also remarkable, however, is that most of the news sites listed all manner of "reasons" for the actions of the two killers, and almost every single one of these reasons later turned out to be true.
Most of this erronous reporting centered on either racism, Marilyn Manson, Hitler worship, or the Internet (or a combination of all of these). None of them touched upon the kids' harrassment at the hands of their peers, their open and ridiculed homosexuality, or their seemingly innocuous threats that were made the day before the events on Usenet. Despite all of this false information, I didn't see a *single* retraction in ANY news source that apologized for false or lacking reporting.
Needless to say, I to this day run into people who are convinced that Marilyn Manson should be banned because they caused the tragedy at Columbine. This is the kind of thing that really demonstrates what power false and sensational media reporting has to mold public opinion and allow travesties of justice like the WAVE program to continue unchecked.
One of the serious downsides of the freedom of speech and the press afforded us by the First Amendment is that people are allowed to say anything, regardless of fact, and get away with it unless someone else objects in a court of law. Of course, in a situation like Columbine there isn't a public figure in the world who would dare risk the alienation of voters by protesting the spread of misinformation by the media about two obviously deranged killers. It is much easier to villify, demonize, and dehumanize murderers and write them off under labels like "psycho" than it is to sit down and attempt to truly understand what has happened.
Of course, the WAVE program is a response to current attempts by school administrators to finally undergo this process of trying to understand what causes such tragedies to occur. The problem lies in that these administrators go about this process with a level of judgement that has already been clouded and molded by the previous erronous media reporting. They may say they are trying to be nonpartial and look at the issue from a new angle, but it is obvious that the government of North Carolina is being strongly influenced by both their own pre-formed opinions, and the pre-formed opinions of the voters who keep them in power.
The solution, then, to stopping programs like WAVE is not to go after the Pinkerton corporation, who like typical coperatists are examining nothing but the bottom line. The solution is to work against the spread of misinformation about teen violence and its causes. The media would much rather continue to report about the threat posed by "social outcasts", then admit their own errors and attempt to rectify the problems their false reporting has created.
The general media, then, can not be looked to to help the situation. The only way we can stop this program from expanding and spawning other, similar programs it to somehow find a means of educating the public, of making them aware of media misreporting and sensationalism. I really don't know where to begin in this process, but I'm sure that if some way could be found to do this, things really could get better.
Of course, there is a real obstacle in that general human nature thirsts for "gossipy" and exaggerated stories. There is nothing like the imagined threat of violence to make life seem so much more exciting than it really is. However, something really needs to be done, or problems created by things like the WAVE program will just continue to get worse.
Slashdot Mirror
I think what makes great science fiction isn't the universe, it's the concept behind it. Of course, you can argue that this is what distinguishes short stories (which tend to be much more concept-oriented) from novels (which need to develop deeper characters, unless you can figure out a device like Asimov used in Foundation to get away with shallow character development). Still, I can think back on the great science fiction I've read, and most of it is really about the ideas, not about the universe.
After all, most sci-fi universes are just our own universe with something changed - a more complicated version of a Sliders episode. If everything were actually different, we'd have no reference point and it wouldn't mean anything. It's the fact that almost everything is the same except for some crucial difference (more advanced technology, or the Nazis winning WW2, etc.) that makes the stories compelling. That's why so many of these stories include some kind of foil character that the reader can identify with (Arthur Dent is a good example of this, but literally almost every single sci-fi book ever written contains at least one main character that is strikingly similar to people contemporary to the author's own culture). The story can often be created simply by allowing the contemporary typical person to clash with the changes introduced in the universe.
I recall last year, during the events at Columbine, when I closely followed the Drudge Report. It is an admittedly sesnationalist news source, but it has its advantages in that it is sensationalist across the board - it will provide links to every source of sensationalist reporting.
What struck me most about the links I found on the Drudge Report is that, given the enormous volume (at least 30) of different news articles it listed regarding Columbine, almost every single article was reporting different "facts" about the story. Most notable, of course, is that until the day after the events, almost every media source in the country was listing a death toll of "at least 25". There is nothing the media likes more than an enormous number of murders to report, presumably because they assume that the number of people who take in their media is directly proportional to the scale of the tragedy being reported. Also remarkable, however, is that most of the news sites listed all manner of "reasons" for the actions of the two killers, and almost every single one of these reasons later turned out to be true.
Most of this erronous reporting centered on either racism, Marilyn Manson, Hitler worship, or the Internet (or a combination of all of these). None of them touched upon the kids' harrassment at the hands of their peers, their open and ridiculed homosexuality, or their seemingly innocuous threats that were made the day before the events on Usenet. Despite all of this false information, I didn't see a *single* retraction in ANY news source that apologized for false or lacking reporting.
Needless to say, I to this day run into people who are convinced that Marilyn Manson should be banned because they caused the tragedy at Columbine. This is the kind of thing that really demonstrates what power false and sensational media reporting has to mold public opinion and allow travesties of justice like the WAVE program to continue unchecked.
One of the serious downsides of the freedom of speech and the press afforded us by the First Amendment is that people are allowed to say anything, regardless of fact, and get away with it unless someone else objects in a court of law. Of course, in a situation like Columbine there isn't a public figure in the world who would dare risk the alienation of voters by protesting the spread of misinformation by the media about two obviously deranged killers. It is much easier to villify, demonize, and dehumanize murderers and write them off under labels like "psycho" than it is to sit down and attempt to truly understand what has happened.
Of course, the WAVE program is a response to current attempts by school administrators to finally undergo this process of trying to understand what causes such tragedies to occur. The problem lies in that these administrators go about this process with a level of judgement that has already been clouded and molded by the previous erronous media reporting. They may say they are trying to be nonpartial and look at the issue from a new angle, but it is obvious that the government of North Carolina is being strongly influenced by both their own pre-formed opinions, and the pre-formed opinions of the voters who keep them in power.
The solution, then, to stopping programs like WAVE is not to go after the Pinkerton corporation, who like typical coperatists are examining nothing but the bottom line. The solution is to work against the spread of misinformation about teen violence and its causes. The media would much rather continue to report about the threat posed by "social outcasts", then admit their own errors and attempt to rectify the problems their false reporting has created.
The general media, then, can not be looked to to help the situation. The only way we can stop this program from expanding and spawning other, similar programs it to somehow find a means of educating the public, of making them aware of media misreporting and sensationalism. I really don't know where to begin in this process, but I'm sure that if some way could be found to do this, things really could get better.
Of course, there is a real obstacle in that general human nature thirsts for "gossipy" and exaggerated stories. There is nothing like the imagined threat of violence to make life seem so much more exciting than it really is. However, something really needs to be done, or problems created by things like the WAVE program will just continue to get worse.