1 year, 4 months ago
Is Opinion Shopping a valid form of enlightenment?
"The commercial success of both Fox News and MSNBC is a source of nonpartisan sadness for me. While I can appreciate the financial logic of drowning television viewers in a flood of opinions designed to confirm their own biases, the trend is not good for the republic." - By Ted Koppel, Washington Post, Sunday, November 14, 2010
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/12/AR2010111202857.html
If we only surround ourselves with like-minded opinions we can never grow intellectually. If the popular truth about the Earth won out, we'd still believe the Earth was flat!
Even Mahalo's success is determined by "Best Answers" chosen through partisan utilities. Liking or not liking an answer doesn't make the information right or wrong. What have we come to these days?
What news sources do you prefer when partisan news is no longer satisfying? How do you fact check (if in fact you even try) partisan reports? How many of you actually believed in the (now admitted lie) of "Death Camps for Grannies" (or any other recent twist of the facts)? My apologies in advance if you didn't know that was misinformation created by partisan organizations.
Have you ever found out the truth later and wished you could go back and change an actual Vote or Candidate choice? How did you verify your new sources? How do you reconcile listening to the same sources that misled you in the past? What steps are you taking now (if you've ever been misled) to prevent that from happening again? Please give examples.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$5 Answers
opinion shopping is essential in todays world. You need to develop critical thinking skills of your own in order to determine if something is a lie, a part lie, or the truth. Unfortunately, this is a skill that isn't really taught to children anymore, my spouse just picked up a little on critical thinking in her second year of university. Examine what information was given to you, then cross reference it with your own research. This is why the internet is such a wonderful tool for us to use. Got an email about cake mixes being poisonous, check it out on snopes.com. Need to know how many people can board a 747, look it up on google. What's the square root of pi? According to fox news it's probably delicious, but I bet wolfram alpha can get you a closer answer.
Take it all with a grain of salt and an open mind, then look to the past and other resources for real answers.
Take it all with a grain of salt and an open mind, then look to the past and other resources for real answers.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
It is ironic and somewhat humorus that Ted Koppel chose an opinion column to lament the existance of too many opinions being espoused too often from too many sources ("if I just add mine, that will help?").
In the case of Mahalo, what we have come to is refreshingly upfront disclaimers throughout the site, encouraging folks to consult a lawyer, a doctor, or consider an answer as only a starting point for their own research. I don't see how that can be anything but good. If in fact Mahalo had experts to judge the answers rather than the "Best answer" process, wouldn't they just have the experts provide the answers? In any case, I would rather read the answers of four or five ordinary folks, and then, if needed, extend my search to expert sources. Sometimes all I want (or need) is a few opinions.
Checking partisan news is somewhat easy, if you are willing to invest the time. The texts for all bills and debate is available on-line and in print, as are the voting records of our congressmen and the decisions (both majority and dissenting) of the Supreme Court. The full texts and actual videos of speeches made by individuals are often available, as are self produced websites by individuals and organizations, waiting for you to log on and see if what they claim matches up with their voting, speaking, and spending. Many times campain contributions indicate loyalties, bought or volunteered. In addition. police reports and evidence presented in court are often available.
I have never voted for anyone that I wished I could change my vote. I suggest that if folks would follow my lead in researching the type of sources that I use, they would not either. I have been dissapointed when I voted for someone whom I HOPED would see the light, but I knew it was a risk based on past associations and party lines.
Opinon "news" raises a subject and gives a biased view (from NPR to FOX). The facts are in the documented behavior. Knowing the subjects or issues being debated, along with the biased "news" viewpoints is important, but knowing the documented facts is more important, and that alone will keep us from making errors in judgement, from being led down the liberal or conservative pathway by the obviously biased "news" sources (which includes all of them).
By the way, I earned a Master of Science degree in Library Science and spent many years in Reference areas of several libraries, choosing which sources to purchase for the library. Bias is a major consideration in library collection building. Along with deciding which sources to purchase, I helped people to use those sources in as nuetral a fashion as possible. This background has been very helpful to me in answering questions on the internet.
In the case of Mahalo, what we have come to is refreshingly upfront disclaimers throughout the site, encouraging folks to consult a lawyer, a doctor, or consider an answer as only a starting point for their own research. I don't see how that can be anything but good. If in fact Mahalo had experts to judge the answers rather than the "Best answer" process, wouldn't they just have the experts provide the answers? In any case, I would rather read the answers of four or five ordinary folks, and then, if needed, extend my search to expert sources. Sometimes all I want (or need) is a few opinions.
Checking partisan news is somewhat easy, if you are willing to invest the time. The texts for all bills and debate is available on-line and in print, as are the voting records of our congressmen and the decisions (both majority and dissenting) of the Supreme Court. The full texts and actual videos of speeches made by individuals are often available, as are self produced websites by individuals and organizations, waiting for you to log on and see if what they claim matches up with their voting, speaking, and spending. Many times campain contributions indicate loyalties, bought or volunteered. In addition. police reports and evidence presented in court are often available.
I have never voted for anyone that I wished I could change my vote. I suggest that if folks would follow my lead in researching the type of sources that I use, they would not either. I have been dissapointed when I voted for someone whom I HOPED would see the light, but I knew it was a risk based on past associations and party lines.
Opinon "news" raises a subject and gives a biased view (from NPR to FOX). The facts are in the documented behavior. Knowing the subjects or issues being debated, along with the biased "news" viewpoints is important, but knowing the documented facts is more important, and that alone will keep us from making errors in judgement, from being led down the liberal or conservative pathway by the obviously biased "news" sources (which includes all of them).
By the way, I earned a Master of Science degree in Library Science and spent many years in Reference areas of several libraries, choosing which sources to purchase for the library. Bias is a major consideration in library collection building. Along with deciding which sources to purchase, I helped people to use those sources in as nuetral a fashion as possible. This background has been very helpful to me in answering questions on the internet.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Yes, I think this can be achieved. Well it depends on who is shopping and what you are shopping for. Is it your company and are you shopping for yourself. Sometimes to get true enlightment you will need to do it yourself because no body can get it done to your satisfaction.Also you would just have to keep searching to find the right audiitor for your company so that the company will have a positive accounting department.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
The phrase "best answer" does not always mean "correct answer". Most people take the best answer as the response that agrees with them and thus validates their own argument and cements their intelligence. The biggest problem with today's media is that they do lean towards one side and stick to it. Completely turning negative reactions towards the opposing side. This is true on both ends and obviously one does it more subtle and less flashy then the other.
Moving on to one's biases. We all know that they rule supreme over anything. Take for instance someone who dislikes President Obama. They may in fact not only believe, but go as far to argue day in and day out that he is a Muslim. In reality, both the facts and words out of his mouth refute that and it is known that he is not. Regardless, people will stick to it as long as it helps out their own cause and when it includes a mass of other supporters you gain majority which in term gains a false sense of validity. It is poison in a society like ours. A lot of the news can be twisted and made to seem like one thing when in fact it is false.
The truth that was can prove lies in our facts. Determining what kind of people politicians are and what not is being closed doors and unavailable to the public. This opens the possibility for people to listen to hear say and come to very unfulfilled conclusions. I feel that having these outrageous personalities on television along with their shows is a good thing when used properly. When the general public hears coming that either attacks or goes against their own beliefs. They should find all the facts to argue it rather then just believe something someone said somewhere. People should search for their knowledge. It is a form of learning but also builds up ones own solid beliefs and thoughts on a whole slew of topics. Many that affect our lives on a daily basis. Find the truth will give you something real to believe it. Whether or not it works in your cause.
Moving on to one's biases. We all know that they rule supreme over anything. Take for instance someone who dislikes President Obama. They may in fact not only believe, but go as far to argue day in and day out that he is a Muslim. In reality, both the facts and words out of his mouth refute that and it is known that he is not. Regardless, people will stick to it as long as it helps out their own cause and when it includes a mass of other supporters you gain majority which in term gains a false sense of validity. It is poison in a society like ours. A lot of the news can be twisted and made to seem like one thing when in fact it is false.
The truth that was can prove lies in our facts. Determining what kind of people politicians are and what not is being closed doors and unavailable to the public. This opens the possibility for people to listen to hear say and come to very unfulfilled conclusions. I feel that having these outrageous personalities on television along with their shows is a good thing when used properly. When the general public hears coming that either attacks or goes against their own beliefs. They should find all the facts to argue it rather then just believe something someone said somewhere. People should search for their knowledge. It is a form of learning but also builds up ones own solid beliefs and thoughts on a whole slew of topics. Many that affect our lives on a daily basis. Find the truth will give you something real to believe it. Whether or not it works in your cause.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
I understand your concerns. But no need for hand wringing! We are in the middle of a media revolution driven by technology. It is no surprise that the vast digital news vacuum that is cable TV and the limitless cyber news void that is the internet have created a perplexing world in which the news staples on which we once relied are on have been marginalized into the dying world of old media.
Paradoxically we are also seeing a media monopoly being created, or more correctly speaking an Oligopoly. Where a number of big players like FOX/ NewsCorp/ Rupert Murdoch are creating an Orwellian new speak grip on the News and twisting or even omitting important News items. Notice how no one in the so called mainstream media reported how congress was stiffing the 911 responders until The John Stewart Show made comment on it?
This is because the power of the dirty dollar makes it expedient for big news outlets to edit out items based what their political and commercial masters want you to hear. In addition the burgeoning new media scene with fast breaking news stories has made traditional news sources like the broad sheet newspaper and the weekly and even monthly news magazine all but redundant. This has resulted big staffing cut backs which in turn has resulted in more poorly researched and sourced stories. Journalists under increasing time and financial constraints no longer have the luxury of long lead times before publication. That is why some of the stories you read on websites are full of elementary spelling and grammar mistakes.
But not to worry! As Old school journalism is forced to evolve, a new breed of blog based news hounds are flooding in to meet the need for news on an ever wider variety of topics. Old media often unthinkingly cannibalizes these stories for its own purposes, often with hilarious or unintended results. We all know that the chinese whisper factor, when added to the oft times barmy, unsubstantiated, or downright malicious blogosphere, can lead to crazy stories viraling around the world. For example obama a muslim? No of course not, but many wrongly think he is. Malicious? Hmmmm, surely not?
Misinformation as a political tool is a concept as old as the ark, so no surprise that pressure groups and marketeers of all shades are now utilizing it, in a web wide orgy of unencumbered self interest. But so what any person of intelligence or discernment knows that you should only believe 10% of what you read and then only after you have had it confirmed by other reliable sources.
For that is the tragedy of the new media reality in which we live. Everyone is a liar unless you know better.
On the subject of choosing political candidates, my advice is that it is always best not to choose them. But if you really feel that you must, there is a simple test to see if they, or their political puppet masters are lying. Are their lips are moving? Then they are lying, nest-lining no goods, who will run you down in their SUV if they think it would do them any good. You have been warned!
Paradoxically we are also seeing a media monopoly being created, or more correctly speaking an Oligopoly. Where a number of big players like FOX/ NewsCorp/ Rupert Murdoch are creating an Orwellian new speak grip on the News and twisting or even omitting important News items. Notice how no one in the so called mainstream media reported how congress was stiffing the 911 responders until The John Stewart Show made comment on it?
This is because the power of the dirty dollar makes it expedient for big news outlets to edit out items based what their political and commercial masters want you to hear. In addition the burgeoning new media scene with fast breaking news stories has made traditional news sources like the broad sheet newspaper and the weekly and even monthly news magazine all but redundant. This has resulted big staffing cut backs which in turn has resulted in more poorly researched and sourced stories. Journalists under increasing time and financial constraints no longer have the luxury of long lead times before publication. That is why some of the stories you read on websites are full of elementary spelling and grammar mistakes.
But not to worry! As Old school journalism is forced to evolve, a new breed of blog based news hounds are flooding in to meet the need for news on an ever wider variety of topics. Old media often unthinkingly cannibalizes these stories for its own purposes, often with hilarious or unintended results. We all know that the chinese whisper factor, when added to the oft times barmy, unsubstantiated, or downright malicious blogosphere, can lead to crazy stories viraling around the world. For example obama a muslim? No of course not, but many wrongly think he is. Malicious? Hmmmm, surely not?
Misinformation as a political tool is a concept as old as the ark, so no surprise that pressure groups and marketeers of all shades are now utilizing it, in a web wide orgy of unencumbered self interest. But so what any person of intelligence or discernment knows that you should only believe 10% of what you read and then only after you have had it confirmed by other reliable sources.
For that is the tragedy of the new media reality in which we live. Everyone is a liar unless you know better.
On the subject of choosing political candidates, my advice is that it is always best not to choose them. But if you really feel that you must, there is a simple test to see if they, or their political puppet masters are lying. Are their lips are moving? Then they are lying, nest-lining no goods, who will run you down in their SUV if they think it would do them any good. You have been warned!
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
@silverhammer
very true, if you tend to believe a certain viewpoint then you are definitely less likely to question it. Tell a child often enough that they are stupid or ugly, and they will believe it sooner or later.
I've found that for myself it took a few wake up calls to start questioning a lot of things. I also had a very excellent librarian (of all educators to teach me this) back in grade 5, that helped me to develop my critical thinking skills early in life. It is easy to convince someone that you are right if they already agree with you (Hitler getting other Germans to kill the Jewish people for example). Personally, I go out of my way to hear the opposing views so that I can use their arguments against them (if I can't find any truth in the viewpoint as it is). Often times with my spouse (she is quite often right about things that I wish I hadn't argued about), we look to the internet to settle our debate. If I can't find any resources, then I concede my battle. If I can, with sufficient evidence, then she will concede.
A large part of the problem is the propagation of mis-information. Another even greater problem (that feeds the mis-information problem) is that our memories are often not what we thought they were.
Fear is probably the easiest way to control people. White people thought that people of colour would come into their homes and rape their children once upon a time.
As far as knowing what I should look into and what I can leave alone.... That's more of a case by case scenario. However, I should point out that I really only look into something when it challenges me or my opinion. There have been exceptions where I have looked into something just to be the opposing view of someone else (mostly my spouse), because I feel that we all need to check our opinions from time to time.
Just last night we had a discussion about the American President being the most powerful man in the world. While I feel that this is officially true, I also feel that there is no way that the military would give someone the secrets that they have collected over the term of that particular president (or any president for that matter) when he could be voted out next election and then captured when he vacations in Mexico (for example). So while he is "officially" the most powerful, he does not have as much power as we believe he does (in my opinion).
Do you feel there are subjects that you are more likely to buy into if it already agrees with your point of view? Or do you go out of your way to listen to opposing views?
I've heard it said that people are afraid that if they listen to opposing views enough they are more likely to convert their own opinions. Does fear play into it at all?
Blacks in the military. Back in the day there was a lot of resistance but once they were forced to mingle on the front lines people discovered (of course) there wasn't that much difference and thereby gained more acceptance.
Our choice of religion is most often based on where we grew up than anything else. Same with our choice of politics. Lot's of armchair Presidents in the world, but not a single one actually digs into the situation enough to realize they could do no better. Pundits, columnists, partisan reporters more often determine what we even hear about than actual information being used or made public.
How do you know what to dig deeper into with your investigatory skills if your own BS meter hasn't been triggered?