…and read what we pay for
There’s an abundance of information on the internet. Much of it is free to consume. Yet quality outlets (rightfully) charge a fee. I have paid for a couple of such subscriptions–most recently (and embarrassingly a little late), The Guardian. Sometimes I feel guilty when I am not able to make the most of the money I’ve spent on acquiring the subscriptions. Of course, there is indeed a lot information on the internet that is freely accessible but most of it is riddled with adverts and arguably, less authentic content, barring perhaps Wikipedia and other encyclopaedia websites.
During the olden days, one had to pay to access a periodical or go to the library to read one, but without the right to own one of course. Now, with information at our fingertips, there’s so much content on the internet vying for our attention. For the curious, there’s plentiful and the mental to-be-read list prolongs, leaving one with guilt when one is not able to read them. Practically, we can’t expect to read anything and everything that comes our way. We live in an age where we can choose to read what we like. And there’s a variety of options to choose from even within the subject that interests us. In such a situation, a question bears on us: what do we choose to read?
An old-fashioned approach to this is (howsoever radical or dogmatic it may seem) to give preference to — when online — reading only what you pay for, so that you place on yourself reasonable constraints. This can temper your sometimes impractical zeal to read everything that’s accessible. This is not to restrict oneself to a set of resources. You wouldn’t be reading this blog if you were following this principle. To make myself clear, and be lenient to the completionist in me, I am only calling for prioritising the books you own and articles you rightfully have access to if they contain information on the topic that interests you. Unless you can afford it, it is not feasible to have a repository of knowledge pertaining to every subject in the world, in your bookshelf. In such cases it is desirable that you look up on the internet. This method accords value to the money you had spent on them. And moreover, one of the reasons you had chosen to pay in the first place is because you appreciate the quality content published on the website. This is the product of labour of many writers who put twice the effort for every penny they receive and make their ideas accessible to you. Why do you think intellectual property violation is such a contentious issue? Why do authors and publishing houses protest against duplication of copyrighted material without their consent? The work they produce is work of the human mind. Ideas are invaluable. Knowledge is invaluable. Accordingly, it has a price. A price every reasonably well-off person in a society ought to be willing to pay.
Wikipedia is an open-resource project maintained out of good will. It was voluntarily decided to keep its information open to all. Yet even wikipedia articles thrive on the back of veritable references to books and journal articles, accessing most of which which requires some kind of payment. The community of editors and contributors who collaborate on this one-of-a-kind great volunteering service to share knowledge themselves access these resources to make it available in a summarised way within the article where appropriate for you.
One mustn’t shirk from their responsibility to pay for knowledge if they are well-positioned to do so. Not everybody can afford, which is why news websites succumb to lending space to advertisements to raise additional revenue. As rational creatures with an undying curiosity, it is only befitting of us to value and recognise the intellectual work of others monetarily, if the case may be so. At a time when billionaires are gobbling news organisations and other sources of information for serving their interests and promoting a slanted version of events as they happen, it is upon us to support the remaining few to keep objective, independent sources alive. Small acts amount to big changes, if we all think alike. In this case, if we all recognise the value of truth. And not give in to ill-informed, manipulated theories of post-truth. It’s not too late to make a change. Do it while you can, don’t give cause for future regrets. And while you can, keep the beacon of hope alive.
The Unsaturated Reader 