What Happened
An opinion column published in La Prensa argues that Panamanian society lacks the reading comprehension and reflective capacity needed for constructive criticism. The essay contends that weak critical skills leave people vulnerable to low-quality journalism, social media misinformation, and even content generated by artificial intelligence.
Author’s Main Points
The writer emphasizes that critical judgment is formed through reading and reflection. According to the column, a large portion of Panamanians has limited reading comprehension, which allows “rambunctious ignorance” on social networks to flourish. The piece criticizes what it calls poor journalists and even worse critics who perform intellectual stunts based on absurd or abusive content.
The column also notes the phenomenon of popular but irresponsible content: the author says that thousands of people read and follow those who publish extreme or false statements, and that such followings reinforce obtuse positions rather than reasoned debate.
Background and Context
The essay situates the problem as part of a broader social pattern shared with other countries: commentators and influencers who stir alarm or outrage gain wide followings. The author warns that Panama need not mirror that pattern and stresses that complacency and poor standards of public argument perpetuate a cycle that benefits corrupt or self-interested actors across the political spectrum.
As an example of misplaced priorities, the column contrasts symbolic or performative measures approved by legislators with the ongoing, tangible problem of water supply failures affecting many parts of the country — arguing lawmakers may promote visible gestures while failing to address life‑impacting infrastructure issues.
What This Means
The piece concludes with a call for more and better critique: a civic culture that values reading, reflection and rigorous public discussion. The author suggests that without stronger criteria for judgment, Panama risks repeating cycles of servility to entrenched interests and ongoing tolerance of corruption.
Implications and Next Steps
Improving public critique, the column implies, would require promoting literacy, media literacy and standards for responsible journalism. While these ideas are presented as the writer’s perspective rather than policy prescriptions, they underscore a common civic argument: higher-quality public debate helps hold institutions accountable and can pressure leaders to address practical problems such as water services.
The author is identified in the original column simply as a writer.