Divisive punditry is a very effective way to get your name out there (not to mention your ideas).
The higher the premium is for our attention, the more incentive there is for employing polarizing tactics as a means of gaining our notice.
This leads an interesting, hypothetical equation in the broader context of knowledge inflation: the more competition there is for public attention, the greater the payoff becomes for being more outlandish, brash, and belligerent than everyone else. If this true, the more knowledge we generate as a society, the more (relatively) ignorant we may need to sound in order to get one another’s attention.
Is it a paradox worth considering? What do you think?