Is the political field more radical than ever before?

We get more information than ever before. But we have a new ability that was impossible before the internet. We can select the information that we read. And we must not read anything that supports our opinions. This thing causes polarization in the information that we get.

If we are reading only things that please us. That thing distorts information. And we might believe that all people we see are members of some kind of street gang or are working in some kind of political movement.  

Our change to select the information that we get makes it possible that we can avoid discussions about that thing. We might see only things that support our opinions. And if somebody criticizes our opinions, we can just close that person out of our social environment. 

The political field is more polarized and radical than ever before. Or this is the thing that many of us believe. Many people saw this when Donald Trump refused to accept the result of the elections. 

And then Trump called his supporters to the streets. The media is full of stories about the problems foreigners are causing and many pictures of armed protesters attacking Congress houses in the USA. But are those things that we see only virtual effects? 

Are things like street gangs a new problem? Those things are been here a long time before us. The only information that is delivered about those things was in crime stories and crime magazines. 

But social media brought that thing in front of our eyes. The fact is that there is a new thing called social media. Social media brought things like political radicalism to common knowledge. And another thing is that the political parties are closer to each other than ever before.

So the only differences between political movements are the attitudes toward weapon-carrying and foreigners. The thing is that the political field is closer to the center than ever before.  

That means the things that brought votes for candidates in the last elections escalated over the entire political field. So the only differences in party programs are highlighted. And that thing feeds the vision of political polarization. Things like an attack on Congress are frightening, and those things seem very dramatic. And dramatic things interested people. 

The price of political campaigns is enormous. And that's why nobody can confess that they have no change. Nobody can leave the game, because the price of those campaigns is so high. So candidates must go to the end even if they see that they have no chance to win. 

When we are thinking about the American election system the candidate who wins the state gets all electors behind the winner. And that means differences in the votes are always artificial. There could be only a couple of votes that resolve the election. And that thing is one of the things, that people should understand when they talk about the American election system. 

When George W. Bush won the campaign in 2001, he won with five votes. Because the presidential campaigns are campaigns for electors there is the possibility that a person who gets fewer natural votes will be elected to president. 

The thing, that makes this possible is that. If the candidate gets more electors that candidate will be elected to president. The reason for that kind of system is that it denies that the president will not turn too strong. But when we are thinking about change. And especially with the internet and social media, we must realize that dramatic things are interesting. Professional journalists require money. 

So from the point of view of earning logic, the newspaper wants something that brings money to them. Even if we see some free newspapers or free media, we must understand that there is somebody who pays the price of that media. If that price is not collected from readers there must be some other thing that brings money to the cash of that newspaper. 

And one thing that brings money is commercials. But the problem with commercials is that people should see them and buy products. If nobody reads articles those advertisers are going to find some other platform for their marketing materials. 

And newspapers publish articles that are interesting to readers. If nobody reads the magazine it will face bankruptcy. So we might think that dramatic things are interesting things and dramatism grow sales. When virtual magazines are marketed people should always ask, "why somebody wants to buy the right to read that thing"?. 

Virtual workspaces are the thing that makes the space that publishers can use unlimited. In modern network-based publishing, the paper is not limiting the work or the writing's length.

 So virtual magazines have not limited anymore how many articles they publish. Virtual workspaces are the tool that allows writing things more freely than ever before. That means the people who are writing to the media must have more interesting stories than before. And that thing sometimes causes overstating in writing. 

https://fromplatoscavetoreality.blogspot.com/