Today in my writing class, the term "public thinkers" came up.
We read an article from some Washington magazine, criticizing the New York Times magazine, it's "ideology," and the stereotypical culture of New York City in general.
Something about hearing "Manhattan" and "New York Times" made my mind jump to Time magazine and my dream job as a photojournalist, travelling the world and taking meaningful photographs, relevant to current issues. I basically spent the rest of the class daydreaming about that life. I would travel, all over. Be constantly in transit, moving, capturing, working. I would have a fancy studio somewhere in NYC to come home to in between trips.
Anyway, partway through class I realized I should focus more on the present, and I happened to catch the discussion about public thinkers.
The article we read was saying how people like the editor of the New York Times magazine had the "intellectual responsibility" to form and share opinions based on meticulous research, facts, and analysis. The argument was that many "public thinkers," as my professor called them, did none of these things. They simply spewed out whatever they felt like and fed it to the ravenous public.
That got me thinking. Why do we have these "public thinkers?" Whether they, these political analysts, journalists, newspaper editors, commentators, are well-informed or not...has society really gotten to the point where we need people to think for us?
All of the (sometimes) well-supported opinions we are fed through the media...why are they necessary? Why can't the public be given the facts, and form opinions for ourselves? It wouldn't kill us to synthesize some information, you know.
I just found it interesting that we, as a public, are fed opinions. Maybe someday we will learn to form our own.