There are two very different reasons why papers like the Times default to the opposing view format for covering a subject. One is that fights make good stories, and the easiest fights to cast and cover are ones with only two sides…. The second reason that journals, and journalists, default to the Opposing View format is that they either don’t know the subject, or have a highly masked position in the matter. Or don’t know that they actually have an opinion on the subject. —Doc Searls
—The Story story (Doc Searls)
Example (according to Doc): The New York Times skews all its stories on file-sharing so that it reflcts Hollywood/Record Compnay opinion that all file sharing is theft, and that protecting the income of these companies is more important than supporting technological innovations that consumers demand. Thus, a reporter whose story quotes an “any file download ought to be criminalized” extremist will counter with a “file sharing should be legal if companies can make money off it” centrist, and leave it at that.
Since I’m not a fan of any particular group or genre of music (I go for weeks without listening to the few CDs I own), I don’t feel like a stakeholder in the “You’ll have to pry my free music from my cold, dead hands” division. But a story quoting a teenager who says “I don’t want to pay for that, all my friends get it for free” doesn’t really do full justice to the “information wants to be free” philosophy that animates Internet culture — and it’s really that philosophy, not the actions of any individual file-sharer, that threatens Old Media.Two generations of music listeners have been taught to appeal to the tastes of a culture it created, to mistrust The Man and seek pleasure. The music is carefully engineered and packaged to deliver a message. I’m amused as I watch the record companies try to impose the ideas of “right” vs “wrong” on a populace trained to roll its eyes at the very mention of such terms as ethics and justice.
Another corner building. Designed and textured. Needs an interior. #blender3d #design #aesthetics #medievalyork #mysteryplay
What have my students learned about creative nonfiction writing? During class they are collaborating on…
Two years after the release of ChatGPT, it may not be surprising that creative work…
I both like and hate that Canvas tracks the number of unmarked assignments that await…
The complex geometry on this wedge building took me all weekend. The interior walls still…
My older siblings say they remember our mother sitting them down to watch a new…
View Comments
Dennis, you've nailed exactly what's made my week so long--my students are writing their first college essays, and are frustrated because I haven't given them 'the question', and instead asked them to find their own questions. I'm struggling to convince them that what matters is writing the essay, not finding a 'correct' answer on which they'll be graded.
Agreed. I see much the same thing in my freshman comp courses -- students who were trained by high school to believe that the answers to all important questions are written in the back of their textbook, and that the measure of "importance" is whether this will be on the test. Those few students who did bring in opposing sides were praised by their busy teachers... and once they get to college, those students have to re-learn the whole concept of the construction of knowledge.
Instead of "And now for an opposing viewpoint," Monty Python got it right with "And now for something completely different."
Interesting thing about this discussion of "the opposing view format for covering a subject" ... it falls victim to a myth that is asserted by the very rhetoric of the news: that there are only two sides to every story, those espoused by proponent and the opponent. Even as we criticize news coverage, we often don't realize that the definition of a "balanced" story is based on the fallacy of there being only two sides to every issue, rather than there sometimes being one unanimous opinion, five different major perspectives, or as many different positions as there are people.