No such thing: The urgency of agency

No matter where I go or what I do – or don’t – these days, there’s no escaping the constant bombardment of someone’s voice, whether that’s an actual voice, an advert or a poorly written – and often grossly and/or grammatically incorrect – public announcement. Whenever I apply for a job, being able to adapt your writing to their tone of voice is at the top of their wish list (where it should be, to be fair).

Please forgive my need to insert the slightly superfluous ‘constant’ in front of ‘bombardment’ – a word that per definition already alludes to a sustained activity – perhaps I was having a mini-stroke, and that it for a millisecond fed/refuelled/resuscitated my aversion to anything less intense than extra extra.

Anyway…

Whenever I turn on the telly, there’s always some beige blob waffling on about some non-topic, seemingly fearful of its own demise lest its non-message gets out everywhere, all at once, despite its obvious lack of talent, knowledge and/or personality, its trivial theatrics drowning out any relevant or important messages that might have accidentally and concurrently gotten onto the airwaves somehow. The Voice! A whole enterprise void of fucking significance, other than being a platform for the beige to celebrate the beige…

Voices, voices everywhere, yet not a speck of inspired insight within the vessels from which they’ve escaped…

Which makes everything seem so trivial, so insignificant, so unfathomably meaningless.

I do fucking love a perfectly placed superlative.

Although, not to a lecherous degree. Enough with the digressions. Despite what you might be thinking, what I wanted to write about today was not voices. No, sir. Today, I write about the message. That’s not to say that the voice or its owner is not important – far from it – but they remain empty. Nothing but conveyors of the all-important message.

We’ve all heard the saying, ‘don’t shoot the messenger’. But, although I wholeheartedly agree that we shouldn’t be going around shooting (most) people, I certainly think that the messenger should be held accountable for any misinterpretations/misrepresentations, and/or the delivery of any messages written with nefarious intent, where there is reason to believe that the delivery of said message will be catastrophic for the recipient.

Speaking of messengers, the pigeon in the post’s header was already far beyond saving when I discovered it on my way to the subway. I played no role in its seemingly grotesque beheading, which I can only imagine to have been some sort of ritual sacrifice to please the rush hour gods. I’ve named him Alfred, my he rest in peace, this eternal half-pigeon of subway lore – perhaps the last of Mike Tyson’s messenger pigeons. Who knows? Maybe, just maybe, he had failed to deliver his message and this was his punishment?

There are quite a few examples where things have gone tits up, merely due to a person’s lack of grasp on punctuation and its function, or they’ve simply failed to adhere to the concept of time and arrived too late (or too early), managing to almost cock up the future of an entire empire.

Research tells me there’s no evidence of punctuation errors having (as of yet) been punishable by death (contrary to popular belief), but I remain hopeful that one of the more reasonable of our world leaders will at least organise some sort of consequential punishment of the monetary variety, to prevent any future violations.

Nevertheless, understanding history is important, in some cases even crucial, but understanding who wrote it and why some things were thoroughly documented whilst others merely mentioned, is equally as (if not more) important, for hear me when I say;

there is no such thing as a neutral messenger.

The messenger may not have an agenda per se, but more often than not when that is the case, they will have been hired by someone who most certainly does. We see this in politics, religion, fahrking reality shows… who can even tell the difference between those three these days?

The media, i.e. us journalists, had one job; to report the news of the world, document both sides of a story to present the general public with the unbiased and honest truth, so that they would be able to form their own opinion based on actual events.

However, it’s been a long time since the media gave a fuck and a half about integrity. It’s all ’bout the money, it’s all about the dumb, dumb, dumb-bah-dumb, dumb. Or whatever Meja sang, way back when. I’d argue that the art of reporting died the second the first Netflix “documentary” aired, presenting one side of a non-story to make it seem as if there was one. This, again, led to a global lapse in judgement across the aforementioned general public, and they somehow started believing everything the internet fed them to be the absolute truth.

Idiocracy had somehow become our reality. Every headline serving up piping hot truths – or, at least, the A/B tested version of someone’s not-so-fresh take on their version of it – made the same article mean different things to different people, based on what type of headline their sordid little selves clicked on. If you’ve spent even a day past fresher’s week in uni, you know just how useful quantitative research is without its qualitative equivalent…

The sociopathic fiend that decided this was something that should be used by the media should perhaps meet a fate similar to that of our avian acquaintance Alfred. Because they have made a villain out of the messenger. The once trusted reported has become a joke, a parody, a liar and a prostitute. They’ve made the world into a place bereft of trust or hope. No wonder folks are fleeing to outer space on a pocket rocket.

If the men in the white coats fail in their attempts to locate my lair, I shall see you next Tuesday. Until then, enjoy this fabulous tune (quite possibly one of the weirdest gems to find in my dad’s cassette collection, squeezed in between E.L.O. and Gary Moore):

There’s a bee in my bonnet

Happy Tuesday! I’m back, from inner space… and something’s been grinding my gears.

A new1 trend appears to have manifested itself onto the meta-verse, where some random humanoid with an indiscernible semi-Scots accent in a run-of-the-mill heather-y hillside excitedly claiming the origin of everyday terms to be Gaelic. I mean, if this is what people want to do with their lives; roam the countryside donning nought but a tourist shop-bought “kilt” and a selfie stick, then, by all means… But don’t try to tell me that you think that everything that sounds the same (ish) means the same. Ever heard of false friends?

If you haven’t, I am willing to bet my finest cardigan on the assumption that you’re not a linguist or philologist. Thus, you should not be “teaching” unassuming doom scrollers about what you reckon might be the origins of the English language. Or any language, for that matter.

What I mean to say is;

Don’t believe everything the Internet tells you.

I would link to one of these videos here, but I don’t want to help spread any more misinformation (and I don’t like to point fingers) – I’m sure they’re nice to animals or something). What I can do, however, is provide some links to proof that this nonsense has been debunked. The word this time, if anyone gives a crêpe, was ‘smashing’:

  1. Wiktionary. Perhaps not always the most reliable of sources, but this seems well-researched.
  2. Apparently, Daniel Cassidy is to blame for this pish. On Cassidy Slang Scam, you can read the following: “There is no evidence of an Irish or Gaelic origin. Smashing does not occur first in Irish or Scottish contexts and there are no conscious references to it as an Irish or Gaelic expression. This is not what we find with hubbub, or shebeen, or banshee, or Tory, or claymore, or slogan.”
  3. Read the entire debunking of New Yorker Cassidy’s poorly researched work here, from the same site as above, only better.

I doubt that the lad in the videos I watched has ever heard of Daniel Cassidy, but he claimed to have all the facts nonetheless. Another thing I fear he’s failed to consider, is that the general public have stopped looking to books and educators for knowledge – instead they scroll away on their social media, mistaking entertainment for education.

Thank goodness the end is nigh.

See, there’s more to verbal communication than just phonemes and syntax – or, speech sounds and sentence structure to you unscholarly types. In fact, did you know that the words describing the sound an owl makes in Danish is slang for penis in Norwegian?

And, don’t take my word for it (even though I do have a degree in linguistics). Look it up! And, no, don’t ask some AI shitbot, use your Internet browser for what it’s worth – really get into it. Even better, if you’ve got access to a Danish book of birdcalls or a trusted Norwegian pal that could let you in on the secrets of their magnificent language, you should check with them. Should your research on owl sounds bring you to the answer2, though, I suggest you resist the urge to type that particular term into your Internet search engine, as it might end up biting you on the arse. Even if you do enjoy having your buttocks nibbled.

In summation, we’d all be better off without the “assistance” of the Internet. Read this short article on Psychology Today, about why you shouldn’t believe everything you read on the Internet, if you’re thirsty for a more in-depth look at the emotional backlash such blind belief can foster.

I’ll go watch this week’s episode of High Potential (yes, using the Internet for streaming purposes, I know) – I’m hooked and I don’t know why. Actually, that’s a lie. I’m hooked because Kaitlin Olson’s performance in this thing is through the roof – as is that of the one and only Judy Reyes. Never before have I enjoyed anything even bordering on crime/whodunnit, but this is a good one. Great, in fact.

To wrap things up, I’d like to give one of my favourite peeps (whose birth fell on this date some 40+ years ago, but who’s counting? Well, he is, because he’s a drummer) a special shout out. You’re a legend and a half, Rob! For those of you having made it through to the end, you can enjoy one of his bands in the below video:

See you next Tuesday!

  1. I am old, so ‘new’ is relative – it could mean anything between now and Y2K ↩︎
  2. Hint: the featured image is a clue ↩︎

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑