Rekieta Law YouTube having a pretty good conversation about how the impact of live commentary during a trial and the internet in general has to be considered for trails moving forward. That everything is instantly fact checked by 100,000 people and immediately accessible. Navigating the noise and what is useful vs useless is difficult, but still. I mean the whole drone video footage stuff is a great example.
View attachment 382733
I mean, this is pretty much the story of our time in a nutshell. Its the reason for all the social upheaval and a lot of the degradation of institutional trust.
Networked intelligence is a thing. Humans working in large groups or very larger groups..work much faster. The only limiting factor through history is signal loss grows in large networks, so as your group grows in size, the ability to control and focus it decreases. However, all through our history--every time we've developed new tools that allow us to share data, the side effects of networked intelligence decreases (Groups become smarter) and with the internet all the sudden networking has become about a million times easier, data can be shared far more fluidly at far higher volumes and across a far bigger diversity of people. Because the networks can be so robust, human capital in those networks can be quite high--for example, a bunch of lawyers can be in the mix on youtube, feeding out expert analysis to the network--while a bunch of autists who aren't experts, use that expert analysis to comb through the data and find nuggets of useful shit (The kind of analysis that 40 years ago would have been impossible without hiring tons of people to do it)
This massive increase in networked intelligence has allowed the public to be far more sophisticated in its skepticism of any particular subject. Just like every Catholic being able to read the bible made them far more sophisticated in their skepticism of the church and its 'experts'. But just like back during the reformation our institutions, including academia, our medical, legal, professional institutions ect have all continued on as if nothing has changed. As if people questioning them were the same as 50 years ago (IE they must be idiots who don't understand anything if they question us!). So when it turns out the skepticism was valid and the 'experts' were wrong and somehow those 'idiot laymen' were onto something, it shits all over trust in the institution.
We are going through a reformation, and in the end I think we're going to see as much upheaval as the one the printing press brought about. The old 'networked intelligences' (Academia and other institutions) aren't going to like how the 'common folk' are catching up and far more able to call them on their bullshit.