RE: [wta-talk] Creating transhumanist-friendly mainstream big media

From: Ramez Naam (mez@apexnano.com)
Date: Mon Jul 07 2003 - 10:53:01 MDT

  • Next message: Harvey Newstrom: "RE: Two papers worth reading. Re: [wta-talk] Specific areas lacking advancement"

    From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 [mailto:gpmap@runbox.com]
    > I think one of the main problems that the extropian -
    > transhumanist movement faces is lack of favorable exposure on
    > mainstream media. The little exposure that we get tends to be
    > mocking or openly hostile.
    >
    > ....
    >
    > How to get much more and much better
    > exposure? I think there are two possible strategies:
    > ---
    > A) "Infiltrating", "penetrating" or "colonizing" existing
    > mainstream big media.
    > B) Creating transhumanist-friendly mainstream big media.

    Transhumanism and extropianism, to the average person, seem pretty
    weird. So long as that's the case, the media is going to cover them
    as oddities. So I don't think you can make major media
    transhumanism-friendly. You'd be better off trying to make
    transhumanism / extropianism more media-friendly.

    How would you do that?

    1) Get rid of jargony, science-fictiony words like "transhuman",
    "extropy", "singularity", and so on.

    2) Increase focus on short-term issues, research goals, and
    possibilities.

    3) Avoid making extreme, alarming, or incomprehensible pronouncements
    on the future.

    4) Recruit respected, high-profile scientists to the organizations (or
    at least their periphery)

    5) Align yourself with mainstream movements and organizations like the
    reproductive rights movement, patient organizations lobbying for stem
    cell research, and more mainstream think tanks.

    Some will say that these sorts of steps would water down or even
    completely destroy the value of these institutions. If there really
    is a technological singularity in the near future, or if molecular
    manufacturing is about to become a reality, or if unfriendly AIs are a
    clear and present danger, then there may be no point to creating a
    more mainstream image.

    On the other hand, a more mainstream image can be more effective in
    the present, and the further away those eschatological technologies
    are, the greater the value of mainstreaming.

    Perhaps what's necessary here is a new entity - one that focuses on
    more mainstream issues and concerns while keeping the longer term
    implications in mind.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 07 2003 - 11:03:25 MDT