Friday, September 21 2012, 10:36AM
“Im not sure why people believe media representation. For me, a change in the way I looked at and viewed the media came with a social science course I took just before starting university. There was a block on politics and media representation. It was a real eye opener, I now never take what the media represents as being a complete picture.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 10:44AM
“Confirmation bias. We naturally seek out media that confirm rather than challenge our pre-existing beliefs.
Ben Goldacre writes about it here: http://tinyurl.com/29cfaj9”
Friday, September 21 2012, 10:48AM
“That is true Jaybe11, and I do still do that sometimes, although i do look for the source of their information, especially if statistics or figures are concerned, as they can often be misrepresented.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 11:48AM
“Just to add another point, I think some look at the media without an open mind, or any common sense or logic. If something sounds illogical or goes against common sense then its probably debatable, look at the representation with questions in your mind.Take for example recent calls by the public and the media for arming the police, i've seen it and read it several times recently...and yet so far from what i've read and heard from the police, they don't want this...so now logic tells me there must be a reason why....Same goes for the death penalty, for the Afghan situation...in fact most situations need looking further into then media and public representation and interpretations.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 1:03PM
“odd how the people who debate rather than dictate have responded to this topic. I think your point Jaybe11 is very true - didn't know it had a term, but it sounds completely plausible to me.
All 3 of your Points also Mam make total sense.
Not doing people down, but these forums give a broad idea of society.
I think there are a few main groups, I don't know if you have ever classified contributors,
they reflect groups in society as well - but people are definitely less inhibited on line.
I think some crave attention, others crave approval, others just like to argue and have no belief in the argument itself, some are easily led, some are uninformed, some think they are more intelligent, whilst others play at being less intelligent and support those they believe to be intelligent without question or reason.
There are very few pragmatists or natural leaders.
Very much like society, I don't know what your opinons are.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 1:24PM
“I do see what you mean Chappy. I certainly form views of the contributors way of thinking (even though i try not to, I think human nature takes over)It can vary on different subjects sometimes, and I expect that would be true of someone like myself. Im more likely to be very open to being corrected and finding myself wrong on subjects like the armed forces or sport for example, as my personal experience is pratically zero...whereas subjects like immigration and benefits, i'm well versed on, and I would be the first to admit I do tend to do as Jaybe11 said and seek evidence to back my own views and discredit some other views...its probably not the best way to debate sometimes, but I think some subjects you feel very strongly about, its hard not to. I'd still like to think id be open to credible evidence contrary to my beliefs, I don't think i've come across anything substantial yet on those subjects.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 1:51PM
“I don't understand this post? x”
Friday, September 21 2012, 1:59PM
“can't fault you on any of that mam35 - I think some people have a problem with those who post on a wide range of subjects - or dispute their views. I am 41, I have varied interests, some I am more well read on, some I would classify myself as a subject matter expert, and others I have a mild interest in. There are obvously subjects I regard as a waste of my time also. But coming from a Military background you find a lot of social and political issues affect you, or your workmates, so you maintain an interest.You have never come across as uninformed on topics, you admit your limitations, but still maintain an interest. Some seem to rally behind a single opinion. For example during the Community Centre Debate, we had a good debate on the legal side of things, whilst others just argued about it being wrong, or can't they move it somewhere else. Not one of them ever said why they had those feelings. Some play the system to deny others a visible argument, and that really dismays me, not just on here, but in society itself through the use of short practice.There are very few people I wouldn't buy a drink for, but there are a few.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 2:04PM
“Rachel, its referring to the ability to see both sides of a story instead of reaching conclusions from reading or watching media outlets, or relying on biased views without considering the evidence and views of others.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 2:29PM
“I think I would summarise myself not as argumentative or militant,but I don't like to see unsubstantiated claims being given credence to,In a lot of my arguments a lot of the animosity towards me and arrogance I appear to show could be avoided if someone acknowledged my point of view and if they then went on to explain to me what they saw as wrong with it, and why.I don't mind being wrong if someone tells me why I am wrong, because ultimately I can learn from it. I don't like the false leaders we have on here and in society. I was once on the receiving end of something I said to you - but you didn't see the whole argument by myself and someone else so the comments appeared out of context, and I felt the need to apologise and explain - but you didn't get to see those either, only some smug postings, and those in support. I couldn't defend myself, not for want of trying.It changed my perception of some people. I am not spiteful, nor am I unforgiving, but I am intollerant of those who will discredit a person every time they make a point rather than debating each point individually regardless of who has made it.If that makes any sense.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 2:36PM
“it makes a lot of sense Chappy. Unfortunately the activities you allude to are the reason some regulars from a few months ago have ceased to contribute which is a shame as they also used to make informed comments like yours.”
“Thank-you Chappy. I have noticed your military background, and I read your posts for reference sometimes, and respect your views. My own experience of people in the forces is limited as I was young when any of my own family were in the forces (im 42) and I only know some from my partners sides stories. So obviously I do pay attention to views of those who have served or are serving when their views are aired.The community centre interested me because it crossed over with some of my other topics of interest, multiculturalism and religion..of course both playing an important role in peoples perceptions at the moment along with benefits and immigration and peoples general tolerance of those 'differences' during economic recession and tough times.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 2:37PM
“Mam35, Nothing wrong with supporting your point with references. I've always been really impressed with your posts for this very reason. I wish more people would do so (beyond linking to the DM or other papers, obviously).
Chappy, You're quite right, people can be more argumentative online. I'm probably not alone in regretting the tone of a couple of my posts. Contributions may appear more brusque than perhaps the writer intended.
I share a suspicion that Mac alluded to last week, that some of the posts appearing under different identities share the same author to give the impression of weight of opinion. Of course I can't back this up but there are certain grammatical characteristics that are apart of more than writing style? Ahem.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 2:39PM
“Over what though or just in geneal? x”
Friday, September 21 2012, 2:57PM
“Indeed jaybe I also agree with your last paragraph.
And thank you Rachel for your example of another group Chappy mentioned.”
Friday, September 21 2012, 3:00PM
“What all of us are saying Rachel is that it is our belief that some people would rather the argument didn't exist than try to win it or concede when proven wrong.
And that some people would sooner look for a source that agrees with them to back up their argument rather than look at both sides of the story.
Whether to be popular, or to save face. And some believe that some appear to have support from others who's traits are suspisciously like their own. I post long posts, and like Jaybe11 I have probably been a bit over the top in my tone or trying to get my point across, which I also regret, but we all post because we believe truly in what we are saying or debating.
It is unfortunate that some feel that spirit of a free debate doesn't exist and have ceased contributing as Jaybe11 has said.
It would be a shame if society were to go the same way, were people with a genuine grievance didn't speak out, or were shouted down.”
Monday, September 24 2012, 10:34AM
“Morning all, the site has been very slow recently it might be a DDoS attack. http://tinyurl.com/jzn67”
Monday, September 24 2012, 10:51AM
“I noticed the same - a topic by mam35 was quoted as me briefly - (I think it's because I was last to comment).”
Something about your area you want to voice and debate with others? Let your community know and see how they feel.
Join the debate
Copyright © 2013 Local World. All Rights Reserved.