4 ms·

The article isn't saying that. It's in quotes becuase they are reporting the words of someone they've deemed to be a reputable source for the topic of standard

by habnds 7y ago

The article isn't saying that. It's in quotes becuase they are reporting the words of someone they've deemed to be a reputable source for the topic of standard administration behavior. You may have an issue with that source's opinion, but that's different from having an issue with Politico.

mistermann 7y ago
> The article isn't saying that. It's in quotes becuase they are reporting the words of someone they've deemed to be a reputable source for the topic of standard administration behavior. Very good point. My claim: "Stating speculation as fact...." itself could be described as sloppy. To clarify: factually, Politico is printing the words of a third party - it is a fact (presumably) that this person made that statement. The statement itself is speculation stated as fact, but the speaker bears the direct guilt for that, not Politico. But I'm not pointing my finger so much at Politico for some sort of outrageous bias, in general or in this particular case, but rather the general way that events in reality are communicated to the public, and the way in which this subsequently manifests in society. Even if nothing nefarious has gone on, people perceive reality and the news the way they do (the specifics of which no one fully understands), and I'm suggesting (based largely on observation of apparent beliefs held by people in forums) that narrative and rumor based reporting like this is having a possibly very serious effect on people's perception of reality, the result being some degree of textbook mass delusion or worse in the public, where prior to cable news and the internet the beliefs would generally have been either null or wrong in other ways.
- habnds 7y ago
  You should look up any number of books about how the US got into the Spanish American War in 1898. It's a very long standing problem. I wouldn't describe an expert's opinion as "speculation". Maybe it's becuase you don't agree with their opinion that you see it that way?
  - mistermann 7y ago
    I'm not sure what the Spanish American War has to do with this? > I wouldn't describe an expert's opinion as "speculation". The person isn't describing an event that occurred, but rather what someone else would have done under a given set of circumstances....he is discussing something that literally did not happen (well, at least to his knowledge - if it had, then his speculation could be proven true, false, or other. But he doesn't know everything that has occurred). It is necessarily speculation, my or your opinion has no bearing on the matter.
    - habnds 7y ago
      "yellow journalism" was a major factor in swaying american public opinion into supporting a war with Spain. It's a very long standing problem. Not a recent development.
      - mistermann 7y ago
        Ok....are you accusing Politico of yellow journalism? Have you changed your mind on the speculation issue?
        habnds 7y ago
        I don't think my point can be made any more clearly. People are misinterpreting the news. It seems like your position is to blame the news, and you seem to think this is a new issue. My position is that this is an inherent factor in production and consumption of the news. Books like Manufacturing Consent, and The Condition of Postmodernity are important to understanding this view and the social processes that support it. A classic example is the reporting on the sinking of the Maine more than 100 years ago. I don't think that forcing news agencies or social media companies to change is a real solution. The solution lies in improving people's ability to read news critically across all mediums and to understand the context of media and social conversation and how it subtly serves those in power. Lastly, I don't agree with your characterization of very standard reporting practices as "presenting speculation as fact" and I've clearly explained why above. This will be my last comment in the thread. Thanks for engaging.

by habnds 7y ago

mistermann 7y ago

> The article isn't saying that. It's in quotes becuase they are reporting the words of someone they've deemed to be a reputable source for the topic of standard administration behavior. Very good point. My claim: "Stating speculation as fact...." itself could be described as sloppy. To clarify: factually, Politico is printing the words of a third party - it is a fact (presumably) that this person made that statement. The statement itself is speculation stated as fact, but the speaker bears the direct guilt for that, not Politico. But I'm not pointing my finger so much at Politico for some sort of outrageous bias, in general or in this particular case, but rather the general way that events in reality are communicated to the public, and the way in which this subsequently manifests in society. Even if nothing nefarious has gone on, people perceive reality and the news the way they do (the specifics of which no one fully understands), and I'm suggesting (based largely on observation of apparent beliefs held by people in forums) that narrative and rumor based reporting like this is having a possibly very serious effect on people's perception of reality, the result being some degree of textbook mass delusion or worse in the public, where prior to cable news and the internet the beliefs would generally have been either null or wrong in other ways.

habnds 7y ago
You should look up any number of books about how the US got into the Spanish American War in 1898. It's a very long standing problem. I wouldn't describe an expert's opinion as "speculation". Maybe it's becuase you don't agree with their opinion that you see it that way?
- mistermann 7y ago
  I'm not sure what the Spanish American War has to do with this? > I wouldn't describe an expert's opinion as "speculation". The person isn't describing an event that occurred, but rather what someone else would have done under a given set of circumstances....he is discussing something that literally did not happen (well, at least to his knowledge - if it had, then his speculation could be proven true, false, or other. But he doesn't know everything that has occurred). It is necessarily speculation, my or your opinion has no bearing on the matter.
  - habnds 7y ago
    "yellow journalism" was a major factor in swaying american public opinion into supporting a war with Spain. It's a very long standing problem. Not a recent development.
    - mistermann 7y ago
      Ok....are you accusing Politico of yellow journalism? Have you changed your mind on the speculation issue?
      - habnds 7y ago
        I don't think my point can be made any more clearly. People are misinterpreting the news. It seems like your position is to blame the news, and you seem to think this is a new issue. My position is that this is an inherent factor in production and consumption of the news. Books like Manufacturing Consent, and The Condition of Postmodernity are important to understanding this view and the social processes that support it. A classic example is the reporting on the sinking of the Maine more than 100 years ago. I don't think that forcing news agencies or social media companies to change is a real solution. The solution lies in improving people's ability to read news critically across all mediums and to understand the context of media and social conversation and how it subtly serves those in power. Lastly, I don't agree with your characterization of very standard reporting practices as "presenting speculation as fact" and I've clearly explained why above. This will be my last comment in the thread. Thanks for engaging.