The definition of non-partisan political information has undergone quite a bit of change from the mid 1950s. There used to be a working press that would present news and information so that people would be informed about the issues of the day. That is not the case, today. Both sides of each and every issue present the message they want you to know and the media chooses which side they want to report on.
When people go to competing factions for this type of factual data, they are being misled. Not presenting facts is one of the worst things that can be done. There are more communication platforms which should make it easier to get the facts out, yet, both sides depend, largely, on misinformation and broad generalizations. They do this to avoid looking like they are for or against anything.
Presenting facts, by the talking heads, would not be in their best interests, or so they believe. Political subject matter, in order to be valuable in their minds, must be what the voters want to hear. This makes it extremely important that the information presented be weighted by good sounding comments. This has ushered in bumper sticker politics. None of this is helpful to news junkies as they do not get anywhere near enough informative reporting.
Take the issue of health care, for example. Factual content would simply report the statistics of the number of people who do not have insurance coverage or who have no access to health care. These listeners are told, instead, the emotional recounting of people who have had problems with health care. They fudge the numbers to make it seem as if millions are unable to access health care in an emergency.
When all of the content presented is emotional it is a good indicator of partisan rhetoric. Take the example of gun control. The assertion that any gun held by any legal resident means just one more dangerous gun that is on the streets is an emotional appeal. It says nothing about what should actually be done because it would cause these proponents to deal with mental health issues, not law abiding citizens.
When debates are announced, people want to believe they can find some non partisan comments. They are disappointed in this belief. The participants will not impart anything that does fit in with the focus they have. That focus is not to upset their opponent because that would make them seem mean or not a team player.
News junkies must cultivate different places to get this type of factual data. There are many websites that claim their non partisan stance on all issues. This is easy to analyze as there will, usually, be an outright advertizement combined with the copy. Sometimes it is hidden better than at other times, however, it will probably be there.
Non-partisan political information is the recitation of facts. They may be good looking and they may be quite ugly. Making them pretty for public consumption is simply lying. Doing this makes for incomplete data, serves to make the speaker look better and does not help the conversation proceed properly.
When people go to competing factions for this type of factual data, they are being misled. Not presenting facts is one of the worst things that can be done. There are more communication platforms which should make it easier to get the facts out, yet, both sides depend, largely, on misinformation and broad generalizations. They do this to avoid looking like they are for or against anything.
Presenting facts, by the talking heads, would not be in their best interests, or so they believe. Political subject matter, in order to be valuable in their minds, must be what the voters want to hear. This makes it extremely important that the information presented be weighted by good sounding comments. This has ushered in bumper sticker politics. None of this is helpful to news junkies as they do not get anywhere near enough informative reporting.
Take the issue of health care, for example. Factual content would simply report the statistics of the number of people who do not have insurance coverage or who have no access to health care. These listeners are told, instead, the emotional recounting of people who have had problems with health care. They fudge the numbers to make it seem as if millions are unable to access health care in an emergency.
When all of the content presented is emotional it is a good indicator of partisan rhetoric. Take the example of gun control. The assertion that any gun held by any legal resident means just one more dangerous gun that is on the streets is an emotional appeal. It says nothing about what should actually be done because it would cause these proponents to deal with mental health issues, not law abiding citizens.
When debates are announced, people want to believe they can find some non partisan comments. They are disappointed in this belief. The participants will not impart anything that does fit in with the focus they have. That focus is not to upset their opponent because that would make them seem mean or not a team player.
News junkies must cultivate different places to get this type of factual data. There are many websites that claim their non partisan stance on all issues. This is easy to analyze as there will, usually, be an outright advertizement combined with the copy. Sometimes it is hidden better than at other times, however, it will probably be there.
Non-partisan political information is the recitation of facts. They may be good looking and they may be quite ugly. Making them pretty for public consumption is simply lying. Doing this makes for incomplete data, serves to make the speaker look better and does not help the conversation proceed properly.
About the Author:
If you are searching for information about non-partisan political information you can trust this source at www.politicalcriticalanalysis.com. Get all the specifics by clicking on this link http://www.politicalcriticalanalysis.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment