3 ms·
Looking at a political speech... just skipping to some of it is an abhorrent idea. That's how you lose context and likely meaning to words. Without condoning o
by manachar 11y ago
Looking at a political speech... just skipping to some of it is an abhorrent idea. That's how you lose context and likely meaning to words.
Without condoning or condemning Trump's speeches, skipping to just parts can radically change your impression of the man and his policies.
This is a problem journalism faces when covering events. They try to edit down to the meaningful parts while retaining the meaning of the whole. I can't imagine that filtering out certain triggering phrases/words would allow you paint a fair picture of him or his policies.
- DougN7 11y agoYou're saying the inverse of the OP's solution. He'd skip over 5%. You're arguing it's not OK to skip over 95%. Skipping 5% of a political speech would probably not be bad, especially if you knew before hand what you specifically didn't want to hear (because you knew what was going to be said). Maybe I've made up my mind on the war on Iraq and I just do not want to hear any more about it. If I don't care about a candidate's position on whether it was right or wrong, don't I have a right to skip that part of their speech?
- marco1 11y agoNobody says you should apply this to political speeches, or sources where the context can be lost due to the cutting in general.
- DanBC 11y agoWhy can't it just be fun? Here's Trump voiced in an East London accent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cA0NM5RAY0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cA0NM5RAY0