Losing to evil intentions is indeed a big problem in the world. Thanks for your comment, Import Reaction Video.

Philosophy & religion should inherently be taught in education, which would partially solve this problem. Ethics. Morality.

The song's criticism on mass media is mainly related to sensationalism.

"Good" things are usually not sensational. They do not demand attention, hence why the code of known/unknown based on selectors for attention filters it out.

Reference Hans-Georg Moeller's explanations of Luhmann's mass media theory based on functionally differentiated systems theory.

Can also compare to Simone Weil's thoughts on collectives and opinion; organizations (thus most part of mass media) should not be allowed to form opinions as this is an act of the intellect, only residing in the individual. Opinion of any form meant to spread lies or parts of the truth rather than the whole truth should be disallowed according to her because truth is a foundational, even the most sacred, need for the soul.

People must be protected against misinformation.

On a general level, the song is not just about criticizing society, but also about stimulating independence... and not just in thought and identity, but in everything.

Don't be dependent on external factors.

Unrelated to the song itself. It is interesting that different people interpret the song's meaning differently. Likely due to individual differences in perspective, history, culture, etc.

Makes me reflect. Is knowledge/wisdom contained solely in content and words? Or is knowledge/wisdom rather contained in the RELATIONSHIP, the INTERACTION, between past experience, previous knowledge (identity) and substance?

Currently I am inclined to go for the latter.

Rob Pirie argues that if one doesn't understand the foundational principles of their society, in the case of the American Republic, the ancient Greek and Roman history, with a consensus on the foundational virtues for society, the society cannot sustain itself.

Thus, he argues, there is a need for classical (self-)education

Interesting thought. This guy relates the upcome of AI (non-fiction) writing to the lack of willingness people have to find out what is true and what is false.

Similar to Nas & Damian Marley's line in the Patience song -- "The average man can't prove of most of the things that he chooses to speak of. And still won't research and find the root of the truth that you seek of."

If you want to form an opinion about something, do this educated, not based on a single source--fact-check, do thorough research.

Charlie Munger's principle. "I never allow myself to have [express] an opinion about anything that I don't know the opponent side's argument better than they do."

It all boils down to a critical self-thinking society.

Interesting thread about Paris Hilton.

Main takeaway: Don't be quick to judge. Only form an opinion based on education; thorough research, evidence-based. If you don't want to invest the effort, then don't form an opinion. Simple as that.

Similar to "Patience" by Nas & Damian Marley.

Also Charlie Munger: "I never allow myself to have [express] an opinion about anything that I don't know the opponent side's argument better than they do."

Epictetus: "He who is properly grounded in life should not have to look for outside approval."

Also: "If you are ever tempted to look outside for approval, realize you have lost your integrity. If you need a witness, be your own."

Do not change as often as the winds... But do not be impervious to change either.

Nietzche: "The snake which cannot cast its skin has to die. As well the minds which are prevented from changing their opinions; they cease to be mind."

There is a balance to be held. Change opinion and outside projection only if applicably by rational thought based on thorough research and nuanced deep understanding. Be principled, yet flexible.

The control of knowledge (or how it is portrayed) means to control the thoughts of people. This goes against freedom. See Simone Weil: the media should give factual knowledge and leave interpretation to the people. Opinion should fall to a person themselves.

System 1 vs. System 2

Counteract the dopamine-dependent short-attention-spanned culture of today. Stop. Take time to think. Reflect. Go away from the devices. Perform analog note-making. Slow down.

First, a man should not have any power over that which he does not understand (deeply).

Second, patience as a virtue is very important here, because developing expertise in an area takes time and effort. One must be devoted.

Following from this manner comes, once again, Charlie Munger's principle... Do not form an opinion if you do not understand multiple perspectives.

"Yes, but I don't have the time to do my own research." is criticism on this principle, I respond with: "But if you aren't even willing to make time to form your opinion based on logic and deep understanding, is it worth having an opinion at all?"

Like Marcus Aurelius said: "The opinion of ten thousand men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject."

You don't ask a lawyer to perform surgery on you, or even to explain it to you theoretically, he does not know anything about this. In the same way, a civilian should not be asked to teach politics.

From the same manner, do not judge before understanding. This is also what Mortimer J. Adler & Charles van Doren advocate: "You must say with reasonable certainty 'I understand' before you can say any of the following: 'I agree,' 'I disagree,' or 'I suspend judgement.'"

This is basically critical thinking. Which is also my goal for (optimal) education: To build a society of people who think for themselves, critical thinkers; those who do not take everything for granted. The skeptics.

See also Nassim Nicolas Taleb's advice to focus on what you DON'T know rather than what you DO know.

Related to syntopical reading/learning as well. (and Charlie Munger's advice). You want to build a complete picture with a broad understanding and nuanced before formulating an opinion.

Remove bias from your judgement (especially when it comes to people or civilizations) and instead base it on logic and deep understanding.

This also relates to (national, but even local) media... How do you know that what the media portrays about something or someone is correct? Don't take it for granted, especially if it is important, and do your own research. Validity of source is important; media is often opinionized and can contain a lot of misinformation.

See also Simone Weil's thoughts on media, especially where she says misinformation spread must be stopped. It is a vital need for the soul to be presented with (factual) truth.