"There is a danger your become dependent on the briefer; the man who can package information in a way thats [short and] comprehensible [the risk is that the briefer will be more of an actor than a thinker]"
This reminds me of something I said in another thread about being succinct vs long-winded and how people tend to ignore you if your posts are too long. It's not necessarily a good or bad thing. The ability to present information in a way that can be understood by the layperson while not sacrificing its integrity is a skill of its own. It is performative to an extent, so I get the actor comparison, but it's not necessarily invalidating. It's like the quote about separating your thinkers and your fighters, so all your fighting is done by fools and all your thinking is done by cowards. If you separate your thinkers from your presenters, you have your thinking done by people who can't communicate their ideas and your presenting done by people who can't think (so, basically social media :P).
The most influential thinkers tend to be really good at presenting information in an easily digestible way. Think of people like Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye, Confucius, etc. Ignoring for the moment that some of the people I listed have egregious personal flaws, they're well known as much for their intelligence as their ability to express the information they have.
It's also worth noting that just because the format is longer doesn't mean it's more accurate. Fascists love to dress up their dogma in long manifestos that make adherents feel smart for reading them.
I think that if someone is truly interested in a topic, they're likely to search out longer articles. I like the rotating summaries of articles on Wikipedia's front page. It's good for getting quick bites of information from a (relatively) reliable source, and if something strikes your interest you can always dive deeper into it. However, I don't think that satisfies the same itch as the information people get from social media, which is basically gossip.
When you're scrolling through social media and see short, quippy factoids, even if it's not something you're particularly interested in it's easy to absorb and repeat them whether they're true or false or just the partial truth. Then when everyone thinks they know something about everything they start to devalue those comprehensive/long-winded authorities and consider them elitist, so it's important for experts to not alienate non-experts.
As to the main question of whether I feel overloaded with information, I don't think so. I'm always looking for something new online to digest, whether it's news, music, videos or conversation here in MelonLand. What tends to make me feel overwhelmed is a constant barrage of negative information, like when the world seems like it's coming undone. I still try to keep aware of the bad things so that I'm not ignorant of the hardships in the world, but I avoid being consumed by them. It's a hard balance to strike without seeming apathetic, but you're no good to anyone if you exhaust yourself with worrying.
Posts: 37/1k.beats 
~ Inconvenience is counterculture ~ 
Author
