"At the Coffee table" .... an exercise

Coffee: A story

There, at the back of the room was a small coffee and tea service table. It was, to most, non-descript. A few cups, a dual set of heating elements, a glass pot on each; one pot containing water, the other coffee. There was a short stack of napkins, a few plastic spoons for stirring, a small dish with artificial sweeteners, and little open bowl with sugar cubes and a small pincer-like set of tongs, and another bowl holding tea bags. Two silver pouring containers sat at each side, each holding creamer, or half and half, for the drinkers' preferences.

In a moment, a man approaches the table; it was the former US President Donald Trump. He scanned the table and gathered a cup, placing it in front of him. Shortly thereafter, another man moves in beside him, it was US President Joseph Biden. “Hi Don.” said Mr. Biden. “Hello Joe.” said Mr. Trump.

Mr. Biden took a cup, and proceeded to grab the coffee pot from the burner, looking at Mr. Trump’s cup. Mr. Trump responded to the glance, “None for me today, I’m sticking with tea. But thank you.” Mr. Biden poured his coffee, as Mr. Trump grabbed the hot water and filled his cup. While Mr. Biden served himself coffee and returned the pot to the burner, Mr. Trump collected the tea bag and began infusing the water with the tea, swishing the contents around the bag.
Mr. Biden, pausing for a moment, picked up the bowl with the sugar cubes, and fiddled with the small tongs.

“Sugar?” he said. Mr. Trump responded, “Yes, thank you.” Mr. Trump passed the tongs up, and grabbed a single cube between his fingers, dropping it into the already darkening tea. Mr. Biden was determined to try to use the tongs, but in the end he mimicked Trumps decision and grabbed two cubes dropping them unceremoniously into the black brew. The result of this was a large droplet of hot coffee splashing out of the cup and landing squarely on the back of his hand, “Ouch!” he said.

Mr. Trump grabbed a napkin and gingerly dabbed the back of Mr. Biden’s hand. Mr. Biden exclaimed “That is very hot coffee.” Mr. Trump answered, “Yes, but my tea, not so much.” As he returned the napkin to the table, it dropped off to the floor. Mr. Biden reflexively began to bend to get the napkin; Mr. Trump interrupted his motion, saying, “I got that.” He bends at the knee, collecting the napkin, and Joe puts his hand on Mr. Trumps shoulder gently.

A few casual interactions ensue, as each gets creamer, mixes their concoctions and then walks away.

=======================================

How could we describe this brief event: A simple encounter? It appears very human, no real conflict or contention. Was it a description of the acts of two people, each getting a hot drink?

- Now think for a moment about yourself. This is the first step of this exercise.

When the name Trump surfaced in the narrative – did you not register something in your mind… was it emotion, anticipation, or was it an external thing poised to provide a litany of thoughts. Did you stop, and allow those thoughts to overtake the narrative? When you saw the word “Biden,” was it the same?

Were you among those who simply could not calm their inner voice from creating “scenarios” that conform to your preferred imagery of the subjects of the narrative? Were there jokes, quips, memes, all clamoring in your thoughts to become dominant? And further, were those “other” external contributions by your mind all focused on denigration, mean-spirited characterization … or were you lost in ideological pantomime, completely unable to simply observe the exchange?

=======================================

- For the second part of this exercise, let’s think on the imagery that could have accompanied an observation of this hypothetical event.

Imagine if you will, the ability to craft a photograph of the two men getting coffee.

There would be one of Mr. Trump appearing to kneel before Mr. Biden. There would be an image of Mr. Biden with his hand on Mr. Trumps’ shoulder, looking grateful, as Mr. Trumps’ eyes were downturned towards the table. There could be many differing views if you mentally readjust the conceptual perspective of the camera in your mind.

What would you do? How would you “frame” the shot? And most importantly, to what end?

=======================================

- For the end of our little exercise think on this:

How would your least and most favorite “news “sources make an account of the events?

Can you imagine them benignly recounting of how the two simply conducted a cordial encounter? Or isn’t it more likely that any images we conjured here could be (and probably would be) mashed and mutilated to endorse some kind of allusion to outrage. Think of the headlines (for example): “Trump kneels before Biden!” or “Biden serves Trump his coffee!” etc.

=======================================

You and I both know this hypothetical scenario would never be reported as it was.

If it ever were to happen – we would never in “modern journalism” be treated to its actual reality. It would be slathered in partisan slop. Characterizations would be infused into it. In fact, outright “inventive” lies would be the order of the task for modern journalists. Outrage, hatred, and even fear would be evoked, stoked, and concretized by the modern editorial ethic.

In fact, can you, my dear ATS members, actually muster the courage to actively refuse the opportunity to engage in the standard “abuse to amuse” practice we see (and have at least tried to contain) here on the board?

I suggest this exercise is to better explain the actual new “purpose” of news accounts. And the purpose is being executed to the point of making it impossible to avoid.

=======================================

In closing:

I understand if you find this a bit pretentious. After all, I’m as guilty as the next guy of failing to contain my passion for a topic, and making a harsh statement about a person or group which manifest as a single entity. Also, I know that the hypothetical scenario I describe above probably would never happen… these guys don’t “get their own coffee,” they have it “served.”

If somehow, I invoked anger, or resentment in you by my exercises, I suggest that you avoid my posts. I am that person who must say what I believe needs saying. It’s how I self-actualize. I’m old enough to accept that I can be wrong, but at the moment my message is this:

Popular “YouTubery” and “Bitchutery” etc., is not a “report,” it is an “accounting.”

Even the sacred media “news” is incapable of describing reality… they must “tell” a story.

In doing so they ‘select’ segments of information, the ‘arrange’ the presentation; they ‘produce’ the imagery as if it was absolute, unassailable. With video, they “choose” music to accompany the narrative… just like a Hollywood entertainment piece. When they are done, they have their own people, their – “talking heads” – comment on it as if it weren’t a production…

These people can’t be “objective” anymore because by their paradigm, “objective” is too dry for “the stupid masses and little people” who must be told “what” to think, and worse, “how” to think.

That feeling that popped into your head when you read the words “Trump” or “Biden” is all the proof one might need to affirm that 'they' have gotten into your head.

My best to all of you, always

Maxmars

You need to get out more.

originally posted by: schuyler
You need to get out more.

Thanks for your time.

a reply to: Maxmars

Don't drink that tea, Trump, it's been poisoned.

originally posted by: MykeNukem
a reply to: Maxmars

Don't drink that tea, Trump, it's been poisoned.

Y'all are making my point for me.

a reply to: Maxmars

I'm pretty sure you're talking to me, as I am guilty as charged.

I grew up viewing the world around me from an emotional level. When I realized that prevented me from using my brain to evaluate a situation, causing me to make less than positive decisions I realized how much easier it is to 'feel' reality than 'face' reality.

I still find reacting emotionally gets triggered automatically on a lot of hot-button topics, and have to make a concerted effort to back up and switch to 'brain/thinking' mode. I don't always win the battle....but when I do the picture comes into much sharper focus.
S&F

a reply to: Maxmars


Perhaps I didn't pass the "test" but I still feel confident in myself and most of the other people here that we do not place our own ideas/beliefs/"sides" above or before a story. This means that we have the ability to read, or hear, a story then base what we think of it on face value then combine it with a host of other information. So most people here are not fooled easily, nor do we take to heart everything we see or hear without digging much, much further.

I, for one, had no ideas forming as I read what you wrote, other than at the very end when I thought "yes, I can see this happening, I can see that both sides are one."

ok, looks like I might need to get out more as well, so going to find something to do

a reply to: nugget1

Actually, I was talking to my kids. Neither I nor they are any different from you, my friend.

It is something we all do. We almost have to. But knowing that it is a decision, because what we see in the 'news' and 'information pieces' that we run across almost always takes for granted that we won't remember that fact about the 'teller' of the story. In part, I think its' natural that we presume the information relayed to us comes without a disingenuous bias, or an 'agenda.'

Occasionally, I might consume information knowing full well that the source is biased, and when I was younger, I thought of it as the exception... now not so much. It seems that the lies are being homogenized in the medium. George and Martha, sad, sad, sad.

a reply to: Maxmars

I'm sure both men are capable of having such an encounter, and had I witnessed the entire thing as it happened, I wouldn't have any trouble believing they were both human, both capable of being polite. But I cannot help but think any rendition of events by the MSM would likely include Trump trying to burn Biden, then being subservient and bowing to his power of some such view of events.

Is that just my distrust of the media, or a genuine knowledge of how things work?

originally posted by: TruthJava
a reply to: Maxmars

ok, looks like I might need to get out more as well, so going to find something to do

Nah... that's just noise.

I'm glad that you approach information in a less reactive state, but my problem is that the bulk of the information seems crafted as to nullify that practice. And maybe - on the pretentious side - that we ought to remind ourselves about such things as we consume and relay information between us.

Thanks

a reply to: network dude

I would suggest that we only be aware that not all stories we are told represent 'the whole' story.

That, and to be careful with hot drinks.

originally posted by: Maxmars
a reply to: network dude

I would suggest that we only be aware that not all stories we are told represent 'the whole' story.

That, and to be careful with hot drinks.

that's why I prefer beer.

originally posted by: Maxmars

originally posted by: MykeNukem
a reply to: Maxmars

Don't drink that tea, Trump, it's been poisoned.

Y'all are making my point for me.

No, that's called humour

What's your point, that MSM and other sources report with an inherent bias that can't be escaped, and we in turn, filter that already biased information through a biased world-view? Does that sum it up, without the wall of text?

There is no "these" people. Everyone, everyone, everyone, filters their information through their "worldview" or "paradigm", no matter what the source is. It's an inherent human trait that won't change, since, everyone has a belief system, whatever that may be. Though, people that are legitimately after the truth, will have a dynamic system that allows them to be wrong and adjust according to reason, the other side will maintain a static system, whereby the changes are arbitrary and linked to emotion.

I kept waiting for the point of the story, and it never came. So in the end, I assumed it was a pointless anecdote.

Crème de la Mème










thanks for the OP

I Believe that Most People have lost the Ability to Reason.
This has turned many into Crazies as they Believe Everything they see and hear.
As for Myself i Like Tea and Coffee but Prefer an Ice Cold Beer.
I saw that as Just Two People having a Conversation the Adult Way of Thinking.
Also We are Normal Everyday People who most live in the Upper Class World
with no Say in Anything Anymore.

a reply to: Maxmars

originally posted by: MykeNukem

What's your point, that MSM and other sources report with an inherent bias that can't be escaped, and we in turn, filter that already biased information through a biased world-view? Does that sum it up, without the wall of text?

Do you really think you've summarized my point in that sentence? If so, congratulations. If not... why that answer?

Did you believe that this was about internal biases and their inevitability in communications, or that the missing element is the willingness to apply acknowledgement in reasoned dialog?

I'd venture to say that "Don't drink that tea, Trump, it's been poisoned." didn't really convey that either way.

The scenario above Is flawed because we all know that Trump would have chosen coffee with no sugar and four McDonalds hamburgers and that Biden would have went for the more haughty choice of tea that he would inevitably spill all over his dress pants before pooping in them causing a level 4 lockdown of washington and lots of people running around in hazmat sutes. I seemed to have missed the point of this thread perhaps.

a reply to: Kenzo

All excellent notions. I am particularly interested in people becoming more familiar with Bernays.

originally posted by: bluesman462002
I Believe that Most People have lost the Ability to Reason.
This has turned many into Crazies as they Believe Everything they see and hear.
...

My take on that is a little different... I would say "I believe that most people have forgotten their ability to reason."

Which has turned me into a crazy person who questions everything I see and hear.

Since that is 'going against the grain' I had to learn to endure the grief of people who find that obtuse and uninteresting.

It's been fun.

Society is conditioned to accept whatever they consume... especially information.
Information is not to "be" consumed... it is not, at its core, a "product."