In Jason Zinser’s article, “The Good, the Bad, and The Daily Show,” he argues that Americans have dissociated from the conventional mainstream of news into a new program that is often filled with “fake” news, such as the The Daily Show. Zinser questions the ethics and validity of “fake” news sources, since these new programs have gained a considerable amount of popularity that can cause a detrimental effect into peoples’ mentality. Zinser acknowledges that fake news is a method to obtain information from a comical and satirical news source, however Zinser exhorts that, “The question isn’t whether Jon Stewart or the show’s producers and writers are morally corrupt people, but whether or not fake news is, on the whole, beneficial or damaging
The author does not signify whatsoever why the high-five does not mean “job well-done”. He gives another argument that each and every person uses the word “suck”, which is a broad claim. However, in his following paragraph, he does not reason why all people use “suckiness”, but rather gives two examples of political leaders who do use it. This is a weak inductive argument, as he assumes that if the famous political leaders use this word, then so does the average person. Here the author should have probably listed a psychological reason that explains why humans react either positively or negatively.
She goes on and compares herself to an American who is not truthful that, “A speaker who tried to fawn on it, butter it up, exaggerate its virtues, play down its faults, and see through any attempt to do so” (L. 21-24). Luce tries to convince her audience that the American press and journalist fail at their jobs by writing false information. Shes also engages what a good journalist is all about that “not only in matters of states, diplomacy, and politics but also that touches the public interest or engages proper public curiosity” (L.29-32). By Luce using logical appeal makes her audience most likely to accept the statements she's made or have a understanding of where she is coming from in her
If a journalist determines that the truth cannot be revealed without some form of deception in obtaining it, their obligation to be transparent to their readers is brought to the forefront. If a journalist is willing to reconcile their pursuit of the truth with the means by which they get it, they must also be willing to tell their audience where they acted deceptively, in order to earn the public’s trust (Uberti). Bauer is completely transparent in his reporting, explaining to the audience where and when he was deceptive, the actions—even if admittedly shameful—that he took as a guard, as well as the methods by which he recorded his time in the prison—via audio-recording pen, and video recording watch
If Singer had presented this stance, his argument would be stronger for he would be acknowledging both sides of the situation and seeking a solution that would accommodate everyone. Sending the $200 or supporting an organization are great ways to help but telling people to not to go out and buy a new television set even though they worked for it may not sit well with many. In this article, Peter Singer examines the moral conscious of mankind, especially Americans, by viewing their habits. In order to do so, he employs the use of short stories to illustrate human tendencies. Although solid, his stance is flawed because he does not acknowledge humans right to enjoy the fruits of their labor.
On July 10th 2014 as told by several news site including my citing of NBC news  that Germany demanded that the top U.S. intelligence official leave immediately over spying allegations. These aren’t even our own people. What reason do we have to spy on another countries people let alone our own? What is worst is that the media has decided to look past these obvious violations of our rights in favor of most of the public and the government. This has reassured me of the need of our personal freedoms and how big
Journalist and author, Dave Cullen, in his book, Columbine, redefines how his readers understand the Columbine tragedy. His purpose is to illustrate the misconceptions Americans have of the shooting by explaining how these misconceptions came about and became rooted in Americans’ minds, although they were so unbelievably wrong. Cullen creates a blunt tone in order to get straight to the facts to show who Eric really was. Through his use of rhetorical devices in this passage, Cullen unravels that Eric was not a bullied outcast like so many believe, but a psychopath. The passage opens with an examination of Eric’s thoughts in the months before Columbine happened, which can be viewed from numerous passages Eric left behind in his journals.
They are afraid that it would change their minds.” Todd leaned forward and locked eyes with Jerry. “What is that supposed to mean?” Jean squinted her eyes. “You’ve heard the conspiracy theories. Perhaps the ones who oppose Memory Shifting believe that the evil government and corporations use Memory Shifting to control us in someway.” Todd leaned back in his seat and crossed his legs. “But, who really believes in that sort of thing, right?” Todd looked at Jean and Jerry before pulling out his phone to check the news.
These viewers will not let themselves be challenged because the audience feels comfortable with the media that favors the same view. However, truth in journalism is a major key, the audience will never have the whole story if the only media the viewers watch are the ones that share the same views as individual. Like Bernie Goldburg states “It is up to the viewer to want to be challenged, to want to find the truth, by following other sources of media, ones that share different views and beliefs.” The truth is plain and simple, it is obvious that bias does exist in media, very strongly and has control on what is said and shown, however bias does also exist in the viewers as well. Viewers mainly stick close to what they believe and share common ground with. Viewers do not want to be challenged, viewers want to hear the beliefs shared with the media is the truth.
In "Fahrenheit 451," The government creates false narratives by trying to limit one's information and knowledge. Beatty gives a speech to Montag describing how "if you don't want to man unhappy politically, don't give him two sides to a question to worry him" (Bradbury 64). This shows how they are brainwashing us and trying to make us feel smart with unimportant information. The government considers "it a great danger" (Bradbury 134) for people to know what is really going on in the world. In "A Summers's Reading" it shows how even though they know how important education is, they are still being lazy and not taking it seriously.