No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
1–10 of 105 posts
Re: No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
#2> our opinions should be formed from a careful examination of arguments and evidence on each side of the issue, reading from only one perspective is akin to not reading at all
The elephant in the room not addressed in this essay is the widespread use of bad faith arguments, and the absence or dismissal of evidence in preference of beliefs and feelings. On some issues it can be extremely difficult to find good faith arguments and evidence on each side of the issue.
For me personally, I'm not going to waste my time attempting to ingest all of the bad faith arguments out there just for the sake of seeking varied perspectives. If you have a claim, persuade me with logic and evidence, not with fear mongoring and throwing straw men down slippery slopes.
Re: No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
#3> our opinions should be formed from a careful examination of arguments and evidence on each side of the issue, reading from only one perspective is akin to not reading at all The elephant in the room not addressed in this essay is the widespread use of bad faith arguments, and the absence or dismissal of evidence in preference of beliefs and feelings. On some issues it can be extremely difficult to find good faith a…
> The elephant in the room not addressed in this essay is the widespread use of bad faith arguments, and the absence or dismissal of evidence in preference of beliefs and feelings
This highlights both a problem an opportunity. How many people know how to make a good argument or how to spot one? How many know what good evidence looks like or how to spot beliefs and assumptions making their way into something?
I would argue that many don't know how to spot or make a good argument. That they can't spot assumptions or what make for good evidence. People are taught something very different and it shows.
Re: No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
#4So, ironically, the free flow of information has made conveying no information the optimal strategy.
Re: No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
#5Yes, of course. If one side wants to behead a scientist for talking about reality and the other side thinks the same scientist should guide policy, we should carefully listen to both sides, and then compromise by cutting the scientist's fingers off. I am very smart.
Not all views have equal value. Giving equal consideration to crackpots and con artists (e.g. flat eathers, alternative medicine advocates, climate change deniers, COVID deniers, antivaxx advocates, election results deniers) only benefits the crackpots and con artists.
Reality matters; promoting a false balance[0] only helps those people who object to reality for dubious reasons.
Re: No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
#6I think many people don't really accept that there can be evidence on both sides of an issue. Once there's a critical mass of evidence on one side, each subsequent piece of evidence on the other side is kinda suspect and can be defeated by simple majority. It's a wrong way to think, but I'm sure my thinking on many issues is also like that.
Re: No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
#7Yes, of course. If one side wants to behead a scientist for talking about reality and the other side thinks the same scientist should guide policy, we should carefully listen to both sides, and then compromise by cutting the scientist's fingers off. I am very smart. Not all views have equal value. Giving equal consideration to crackpots and con artists (e.g. flat eathers, alternative medicine advocates, climate chang…
You are exactly the target audience for these outlets.
Re: No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
#8I don't understand why news sites do not add references and footnotes to their articles. I have been working on an idea for a site that makes "mind maps" of a graph of facts inside of news articles to show how conclusions are reached. However, I think the average person's critical reasoning skills would not appreciate this and just believe what they want to hear.
Re: No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
#9> our opinions should be formed from a careful examination of arguments and evidence on each side of the issue, reading from only one perspective is akin to not reading at all The elephant in the room not addressed in this essay is the widespread use of bad faith arguments, and the absence or dismissal of evidence in preference of beliefs and feelings. On some issues it can be extremely difficult to find good faith a…
> The elephant in the room not addressed in this essay is the widespread use of bad faith arguments, and the absence or dismissal of evidence in preference of beliefs and feelings This highlights both a problem an opportunity. How many people know how to make a good argument or how to spot one? How many know what good evidence looks like or how to spot beliefs and assumptions making their way into something? I would…
> How many people know how to make a good argument or how to spot one?
Even if you could spot "good" arguments that really isn't enough without knowing that it's also made in good faith. If the person making an argument doesn't actually believe what they're saying, is arguing with a particular outcome, or is arguing with an ulterior motive like flame-bait then you also shouldn't bother engaging them even if it's well-formed.
I would take a bad argument made in good faith every time over the reverse. People who speak genuinely but are passionate, emotional, or aren't the best at expressing themselves can have productive conversations. Someone who's arguing to win isn't worth your time.
Re: No surprises here – On the absence of information in today’s media
#10Love the approach of looking at media through the lens of information theory.
A main point seems to be that free media is important.
It’s interesting to consider that the existence of google/craigslist/facebook destroyed the means by which the media used to fund their own existence and hire competent people with a high salary (now these people work in other areas of the economy and are compensated for their communication skills).
In an economy like this, we have no functioning media, therefore democracy is at risk.