Thanks for putting so perfectly into words what we’ve all been thinking. With flat screens being so large and taking up so much space yelling at your television is the equivalent of talking to a wall.
I regularly tear my hair over the NYT doctrine of false equivalence. Not much accuracy checking on their columns, either, as seen in the space given Pamela Paul to rail against trans people.
It is going to be a long time before people understand what Murc's Law has done. I think a false equivalence bias could be one of the key motivations driving it, it though probably isn't the only reason.
It is also deeply disturbing that so many people have genuinely convinced themselves that as a normative matter they have to cover "both sides" to be "objective". Neutrality or "fairness" of this kind confers no objectivity and distorts facts that are. However, many in the media don't see it that way. Oh well, I guess.
Thanks for putting so perfectly into words what we’ve all been thinking. With flat screens being so large and taking up so much space yelling at your television is the equivalent of talking to a wall.
I regularly tear my hair over the NYT doctrine of false equivalence. Not much accuracy checking on their columns, either, as seen in the space given Pamela Paul to rail against trans people.
It is going to be a long time before people understand what Murc's Law has done. I think a false equivalence bias could be one of the key motivations driving it, it though probably isn't the only reason.
Love this!
It is also deeply disturbing that so many people have genuinely convinced themselves that as a normative matter they have to cover "both sides" to be "objective". Neutrality or "fairness" of this kind confers no objectivity and distorts facts that are. However, many in the media don't see it that way. Oh well, I guess.