Are we a self-reinforcing bubble?

[Ein Heldenleben]

I don't think this forum is a bubble any more than the C of E is a bubble. The problem ,as I understand it as I very rarely use it , with Facebook , which is overwhelmingly the predominant social medium, is that one can create a cocoon of like minded souls and news feeds giving one a distorted view of the world . It differs say from reading the Guardian or Telegraph in its all -pervasiveness and the sheer amount of time people spend on it . Many of these news feeds are poorly evidenced and designed to provoke anger or unthinking consent - anything for a click really .
What is good about this forum is the quality of evidence people use to support their assertions. It is interesting to observe , for want of a better word the psychopathology of some web fora where the commenters know each other well, know their trigger points and almost seem to be spoiling for a fight .
It might be though that the reticence of people on this forum means that the following opinions are rarely heard -
1. Bernard Haitink is an indifferent conductor
2 Katie Derham is an excellent presenter
3 . Twelve tone music will never catch on
4 . On the whole the move to more popular fare on R3 has been a good thing.
Or it could be that those who think these things have chosen to go elsewhere .....

[Pabmusic]

You can have that one.

Anyway, hope the writing is going well.
Got a publisher ?

Yes - had one before I started. Dealing with photos at the moment (such a pain!).

[teamsaint]

Yes - had one before I started. Dealing with photos at the moment (such a pain!).

Thankfully I never get involved in the photo side of things. Our editors always seem to have issues sourcing/ costing/ whatever.

[french frank]

I don't think this forum is a bubble any more than the C of E is a bubble.

I don't either. We may be 'like-minded' on some subjects, but we don't all think the same about the entire range of everything that's discussed. At worst (or best) we're a series of interlocking bubbles.

[Lat-Literal]

The bubble is expanding.

21 people on WM at one time recently - and look at the figures for Performance (123), Talking About Music (81) and the Arts boards (20) currently.

Something is happening.

As for Welby, the ex professional civil servant (and this applies to other disciplines) brings to a forum both a desire to be broadly in line with any perceived structure and manifesto and his lifelong sense of individuality. There can be a tension between those two points forever more. I probably try more than most to conform as I see it and fail more than most.

People find it easiest to hold to any line when paid to do so. There it can depending on the person be applied rigidly (albeit with double standards). That is largely how and why the official news media reinforces itself and hopes to incorporate readership etc. The accent is increasingly on alarm. That for some reason is what grabs the attention and it still sells in a climate where political social media is even more extreme and self-reinforcing in semi-opposition. The option that is less available is the less extreme and the decidedly non-neurotic.

Re the Church(es), well, I tested that one a year or two ago. It turned out that while I thought conventional religion and a single spirituality were not at all mutually exclusive, the ex business people (often in the public sector) who are today's clergy could not respond in any sort of way that suggested they felt similarly. Consequently, I "felt" told I was wrong.

[Padraig]

... and Margaret Barry on Private Passions.

[MrGongGong]

First night? Are you not Panning from one end to the other?

Quite right
My mistake

[ardcarp]

Good to hear from you Pabs. Lokk forwartd to buying the book. Hope the royalties trickle down to you! My knowledge needs expanding beyond Banks of GW and the Shropshire Lad Songs. Oh that very English sort of yearning.......

[Beef Oven!]

The arts generally (and the 'high arts' in particular) tend to attract people who are of a left wing bent, though there are notable exceptions.

Because of this there will always be occasional soi-disant gadflies who react to what they perceive to be a prevailing left-wing orthodoxy.

You shouldn't refer to me as a soi-disant gadfly, keep those opinions to yourself and keep within the house rules. I've asked the moderator to remove your insulting comment.

[oddoneout]

Self-reinforcing bubble would perhaps be how most of the UK population would view this forum, given that the general view seems to be that there is no point to R3. I would suggest that it is more self-selecting than self-reinforcing - you wouldn't presumably wish to join unless you had some interest in R3? That is rather different in my view from being part of what may start out as a general group but thanks to the wonders of the internet becomes a manipulated body sharing a common(at best ill-informed, at worst downright wrong) view. In some respects this is nothing new; I remember years ago when working in a supermarket my despair when I found that discussion in the work canteen was limited to what the Sun had to say - 'it's in the paper so it must be right, they wouldn't say it otherwise' - was frequently heard.

[french frank]

I remember years ago when working in a supermarket my despair when I found that discussion in the work canteen was limited to what the Sun had to say - 'it's in the paper so it must be right, they wouldn't say it otherwise' - was frequently heard.

Isn't this what Barenboim was referring to when he said people needed 'education'? Though my own view is that education will never help some people. Even more distressing is intelligent people watching television programmes because 'it's what they'll be discussing at work'; and no doubt one wouldn't wish to be left out of that bubble.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

You shouldn't refer to me as a soi-disant gadfly, keep those opinions to yourself and keep within the house rules. I've asked the moderator to remove your insulting comment.

I've edited out the personalised reference - as for the "soi-disant gadflies" (once I'd looked up what "soi-disant" means!) it occurred to me that anyone who refers to anyone else as a "gadfly" in such a context is spitting into the wind somewhat. Concerning the reference to myself as "a left wing bent", I choose to treat it with the contempt it deserves, until I can think of a suitably acerbic put-down.

[Beef Oven!]

The arts generally (and the 'high arts' in particular) tend to attract people who are of a left wing bent, though there are notable exceptions.

Because of this there will always be occasional soi-disant gadflies who react to what they perceive to be a prevailing left-wing orthodoxy.

There will always be occasional morons who just don't get the fact the the left-wing orthodoxy isn't a perception, but a reality.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I've received a number of e-Mail complaints (literally, some) about exchanges of insults. Can we please bear in mind that posts can't communicate tone of voice, and refrain from calling each other "gadflies", "morons", or whatever - it upsets people (not just the intended recipients) and detracts from any valid points also made in such posts.

I think Conchis is correct in saying that "The Arts ... tend to attract people who are ... Left Wing", and correct in also pointing out that there are many who aren't. BeefO is also correct, I think, in pointing out that there are many Forumistas who are - in the broadest sense (and "Left Wing" indicates a huge variety of opinions) - leftist in opinion; I don't think that this amounts to a Forum "orthodoxy": being so inclined myself, I'm probably not the best judge - but there are sufficient Forumistas who make regular contributions and who are essential to the success of the Forum, and who I suspect would be aghast to hear themselves described as "of a left wing bent" to contradict (or at least to counter-balance) the suggestion that the prevalent viewpoint is an "orthodoxy".

Now, maybe that makes me an "occasional moron" (I've been called worse) - but that is how I see the political spectrum of the Forum. And it illustrates why Political discussions are so discouraged on the Forum - they always end up in exchanges of invective. As the Forum is no longer under the jurisdiction of a single Administrator, but shared between the various Hosts, complaints are now dealt with after all Hosts have seen and (theoretically) discussed them. Life's too short, guys - the prevailing opinion amongst the Hosts is that whilst we'd prefer not to "ban" political discussions, this is better for Forum harmony than the double fugue of insults and complaints that sadly results (almost inevitably) from such discussions.

I don't want to "censor" opinion sharing, and I don't want to close potentially interesting Threads; but I also don't want to spend over half-an-hour of a Sunday afternoon composing a general reply to the various PMs and e-Mails I've received. Above all, I don't want to see the Forum lose members and vitality because of such discussions.

Let's try and keep it civil, avoid personal comments, and try (even in spite of evidence to the contrary) to take for granted that other Forumistas aren't "getting at us" personally. We all enjoy the Forum for what it brings to us - we'd all hate to lose it because of "other content".

[ahinton]

I've received a number of e-Mail complaints (literally, some) about exchanges of insults. Can we please bear in mind that posts can't communicate tone of voice, and refrain from calling each other "gadflies", "morons", or whatever - it upsets people (not just the intended recipients) and detracts from any valid points also made in such posts.

I think Conchis is correct in saying that "The Arts ... tend to attract people who are ... Left Wing", and correct in also pointing out that there are many who aren't. BeefO is also correct, I think, in pointing out that there are many Forumistas who are - in the broadest sense (and "Left Wing" indicates a huge variety of opinions) - leftist in opinion; I don't think that this amounts to a Forum "orthodoxy": being so inclined myself, I'm probably not the best judge - but there are sufficient Forumistas who make regular contributions and who are essential to the success of the Forum, and who I suspect would be aghast to hear themselves described as "of a left wing bent" to contradict (or at least to counter-balance) the suggestion that the prevalent viewpoint is an "orthodoxy".

Now, maybe that makes me an "occasional moron" (I've been called worse) - but that is how I see the political spectrum of the Forum. And it illustrates why Political discussions are so discouraged on the Forum - they always end up in exchanges of invective. As the Forum is no longer under the jurisdiction of a single Administrator, but shared between the various Hosts, complaints are now dealt with after all Hosts have seen and (theoretically) discussed them. Life's too short, guys - the prevailing opinion amongst the Hosts is that whilst we'd prefer not to "ban" political discussions, this is better for Forum harmony than the double fugue of insults and complaints that sadly results (almost inevitably) from such discussions.

I don't want to "censor" opinion sharing, and I don't want to close potentially interesting Threads; but I also don't want to spend over half-an-hour of a Sunday afternoon composing a general reply to the various PMs and e-Mails I've received. Above all, I don't want to see the Forum lose members and vitality because of such discussions.

Let's try and keep it civil, avoid personal comments, and try (even in spite of evidence to the contrary) to take for granted that other Forumistas aren't "getting at us" personally. We all enjoy the Forum for what it brings to us - we'd all hate to lose it because of "other content".

Very well said, sir!