Rewriting Albert Einstein’s Equation E=mc2 Into frankEinstein's fE=mc2 – For The Infinitesimal Energy Of Love!

This one has been inspired by the Facebook sharing of friend Jerry R Yapo on Sunday, 13 Oct, from BookPlug: “Here Are 10 Key Lessons From Why I Write By George Orwell” – today, I agree with all 10 lessons, except #5: “Writing as a form of protest.” In fact, up to a couple of months ago, I was writing as a Protestant, I mean Protester! Today, I write as a Creator & Convincer – changing from Negative to Positive. I love it!

Instead of looking for something to decry, somebody to blame, some excuse to insult groups or people, I now look forward every single day for a Brave New World! Which is the title of a book by British author Aldous Huxley. Wikipedia says of it (en.wikipedia.org):

“Brave New World … Largely set in a futuristic World State … the novel anticipates huge scientific advancements in reproductive technology, sleep-learning, psychological manipulation and classical conditioning…”

Differently, my Brave New Word (note the 3^rd word) is set on the present. I write on current knowledge available on the Internet.

Thus, I owe the world’s genius Albert Einstein’s genius erarth-shaking equation – E=mc² – my new formula for writing:

fE=mc²
where
fE is frankEinstein
m is manuscript squared by
c  = any or all of these: care, collaboration, consent, cooperation,
(NOT condemnation, contempt, criticism, cussing…)

frankEinstein – I love my Brave New Word!

And so I learn from Orwell (I’m selecting now):

“7. The Moral Responsibility of Writers: Orwell believed that writers have a moral obligation to use their platform for good, by speaking truth to power and addressing social issues. Writers should be honest and fearless in their pursuit of truth.”

I see and insist about the moral obligation of writers: “to use their platform for good.” How? Orwell says, “by speaking truth to power” and that “writers should be honest and fearless in their pursuit of truth.”

Ah! This is where I beg to disagree with Orwell, as I do not pursue truth for its own sake. I call my writing “THiNK! Journalism,” which runs like this:

Is it
True? If True, is it
Helpful? If Helpful, is it
Inspiring? If Inspiring, is it
Necessary? If Necessary, is it
Kind? THiNK!

Orwell’s line of thinking is fit in this modern world especially with the tempting offer of a Nobel Peace Prize for the “Brave New World” of “Truth Journalism,” which earned for Filipina journalist Maria Ressa the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011, bringing home US$1,000,000/2!

Would I like to receive myself a Nobel Peace Prize? Oh yes, absolutely! Would my writings satisfy the Nobel Committee’s overall measure of “Truth Journalism,” which is Maria Ressa’s? Absolutely not!

The Nobel Prize-winning Truth Journalism of Ms Ressa will not even satisfy the requirement of the Rotary Club’s “4-Way Test” – “Is it the truth? Is it fair to all concerned? Will it build goodwill and better friendships? Will it be beneficial to all concerned?”

Now, do you see how my new formula “fE=mc²” is related to my old THiNK! Journalism? THiNK!@517