4 ms·
I don't see how you reached that conclusion. He's written about this in his book. He exaggerates and says something controversial in order to get people talkin
by reddytowns 10y ago
I don't see how you reached that conclusion.
He's written about this in his book. He exaggerates and says something controversial in order to get people talking about things they'd otherwise like to ignore. Why isn't this a possibility in your mind, here?
- kafkaesq 10y agoHe should stick to writing books (through ghostwriters) then. When issued from the seat of power, statements such as these take on an entirely different character. If he isn't aware (or doesn't appreciate the significance) of such distinctions -- and how much real chaos, and pure and utter waste these, and similar statements generate -- then clearly, this just isn't the right job for him.
- reddytowns 10y agoWhat "chaos" and what "waste" do these statements generate? Here is a man fighting against nearly the entirety of the news media which control the main communication channels. If he's not supposed to use misdirection and hyperbole to fight back, how can he possibly expect to get his side of the story out there?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- kafkaesq 10y agoIf he's not supposed to use misdirection and hyperbole to fight back, how can he possibly expect to get his side of the story out there? Beats me. But at least we agree as to the basic nutshell description of his standard communication technique.