The Is

Issue 30

stalkerproduction.com

Starting today, let’s not confuse the is with the news. They are two different things that, as conscious politics practitioners, we will now revel in discerning between. (Just say yes.)

For the purposes of this conversation, the news is the everyday “mainstream,” often corporate, sometimes independent information we regularly consume and discuss with one another. This calls for broad strokes, people, painted from some number of feet above the landscape. By practicing presence, we accept, without judgment, the existence of all of it just as we accept, without judgment, what, how, and why any of us consume what we do. That is not our problem today. Our problem today is that when we consume this information we haphazardly call it the news. And while this is nobody’s fault, an insidious dearth of consciousness lurks within our habit.

We believe that tending to/consuming the news keeps us informed. We believe it’s smart to be informed. We believe it’s our responsibility as citizens to be informed Yes, yes, and yes. But much of what we call the news actually isn’t. It’s information that, in the main, insidiously and unwittingly keeps our collective attention away from what we want and virtually exclusively on variations of what is. When what is, is other than what is wanted, it’s anathema, not smart, and not responsible to stay focused upon it because of our frenemy, the law of attraction.

I spun last week’s news wheel and landed on Thursday’s story that the U.S. House of Representatives passed The Equality Act. That story is now fodder for helping us discern today between what is and isn’t news. I’m just one guy here and, broad strokes-wise, this is the news I’ve consumed about it in the first 48 hours:

• the announcement that it passed the House including who did/didn’t support it (news)

• some history of profound LGBTQ pain and suffering as rationale for the legislation (awful; what is/has been; not what’s wanted; not news)

• religious arguments for and against (extremely not news)

• countless takes, also known as opinion and commentary, from innumerable individuals and outlets (not news)

• a lot about potential pitfalls as the legislation wends its way through the process to that formerly august body, the U.S. Senate (speculation; not news)

In other words, a lot of information about history plus repetitious arguments about God plus punditry aplenty all adding up to some news wrapped in a huge load of not-news. As a result, I feel confidently informed about the legislation, what it is supposed to do, and what certain people think about it. Now, though, the news has me in a wait and see posture, rife with speculation about what may or may not ever happen and virtually devoid of the intention of the legislation itself, i.e., what we are wanting. From a conscious practice perspective, waiting and speculating is never a smart investment of time and energy.

Our problem today is that when we consume this information we call it the news. And while this is nobody’s fault, an insidious dearth of consciousness lurks within our habit.

Here’s how CMN — the Conscious Media Network in my mind — would expand the same story. We would, first and foremost, label the shit out of everything. If it’s actually breaking for the first time or within the last 24 hours or so, it would be labeled news. If it is history being reported — for context — it would be labeled as history for context. If it’s an ongoing story, it will be labeled ongoing with the new part clearly labeled. If it’s commentary and opinion about what got us here, it would be labeled as commentary and opinion. If it’s expounding upon what may or may not happen in the Senate, it would be labeled as speculation. But wait, we’re just getting started.

We would expand the story by focusing on its intention: extending rights to people who have not had them and what happens when they do. Imagine countless, innumerable stories of people anywhere and everywhere who have been granted rights. Imagine Americans learning about and focused upon the notion of extending rights to people; our own history of doing so; what it does to/for those who receive them; what it fosters in those who do the extending. Stuff like that there.

We would expand the story by contextualizing it as an example of the new consciousness, steeped as it is in compassionate action.

We would expand the story by talking far less about which individuals, organizations, and political parties are lined up on which side of the issue and far more about the beliefs that undergird their positions. Now our viewers are thinking and talking at the level of belief, a conscious way to defuse everyday political warfare.

We would expand the story by airing countless and innumerable stories, commentary, and opinion about people who struggled to be compassionate toward others they did not know or understand and how they overcame their struggle. We would essentially normalize and “make cool” the act of growing our compassion muscles new-consciousness-wise.

The content emanating from this network would go far to assuage the insidious pain derived from investing so much of our time and energy into what is unwanted. It would lead and inspire us to invest more of our time and energy on what we do want. It would change our conversations. It would render us much more able to discern news from not-news. It would make our society more conscious.

The is, is. But it isn’t where it’s at.