Comment Re:Dead serious is right (Score 1) 1254
There is an answer to this question that is very relevant to the topic article and it's all about viewpoint.
Viewpoint is what people in this country, and seem to be looking for. People here seem to like their facts pre-digested so that instead of thinking for themselves, someone has already done the thinking for them. Much of the public wants a well understood perspective on the news as well as on their politicians. They want their information fed with an angle attached. Normal journalism is about presenting facts and letting you come to your own conclusions.
Fact 1: Joe lied to us.
Fact 2: Joe is asking us to trust him.
Normal journalism ends there and leaves it to you to make the conclusion.
Conclusion: I should not trust Joe because he lied to us once already.
Viewpoint/angle is all about making the conclusion jump for you. Fox News' angle is to say, especially if Joe is a Democrat, "You're a liar we're not going to trust you!" Jon Stewart presents both fact clips and says "Have you heard the story about the boy who cried wolf?" and gets a laugh. Both approaches are presenting the facts with a spin. Both shows pre-digest and present you with the opinion you should have. Some even argue that this is just a way of embracing the inherent bias in any journalistic piece.
Bush is the candidate who predigests the information for the American people and comes from the viewpoint of Fox News of telling you what you're opinion is. John Kerry is actually more of a pure journalist in that he knows all the facts but has never given us the confidence that he knows how to come to a conclusion. All Presidents need to come to a conclusion about matters. Bush does it in a second, Kerry never seems to, so he comes across as flip-flopping. Just like most people in this country like to be told what to think since they're not comfortable doing that themselves, people like that Bush does the thinking for them and tells them what to think. It's comforting.
Whether his conclusions are correct are up for debate. I personally think that his Iraq philosophy was not inherently flawed, the plan to get it done it turns out was. I like his vision, he's not smart enough to accomplish it though. I'm not convinced Kerry has a vision. Average intelligence man with a plan or smart man without, which do you choose? I'm still undecided.
Viewpoint is what people in this country, and seem to be looking for. People here seem to like their facts pre-digested so that instead of thinking for themselves, someone has already done the thinking for them. Much of the public wants a well understood perspective on the news as well as on their politicians. They want their information fed with an angle attached. Normal journalism is about presenting facts and letting you come to your own conclusions.
Fact 1: Joe lied to us.
Fact 2: Joe is asking us to trust him.
Normal journalism ends there and leaves it to you to make the conclusion.
Conclusion: I should not trust Joe because he lied to us once already.
Viewpoint/angle is all about making the conclusion jump for you. Fox News' angle is to say, especially if Joe is a Democrat, "You're a liar we're not going to trust you!" Jon Stewart presents both fact clips and says "Have you heard the story about the boy who cried wolf?" and gets a laugh. Both approaches are presenting the facts with a spin. Both shows pre-digest and present you with the opinion you should have. Some even argue that this is just a way of embracing the inherent bias in any journalistic piece.
Bush is the candidate who predigests the information for the American people and comes from the viewpoint of Fox News of telling you what you're opinion is. John Kerry is actually more of a pure journalist in that he knows all the facts but has never given us the confidence that he knows how to come to a conclusion. All Presidents need to come to a conclusion about matters. Bush does it in a second, Kerry never seems to, so he comes across as flip-flopping. Just like most people in this country like to be told what to think since they're not comfortable doing that themselves, people like that Bush does the thinking for them and tells them what to think. It's comforting.
Whether his conclusions are correct are up for debate. I personally think that his Iraq philosophy was not inherently flawed, the plan to get it done it turns out was. I like his vision, he's not smart enough to accomplish it though. I'm not convinced Kerry has a vision. Average intelligence man with a plan or smart man without, which do you choose? I'm still undecided.
