Part 1:
I must say that I actually found this article to be a little interesting. I like how the author lists statistics in order to get specific points across because this seems more content-specific and right to the point. So, this article is shorter than the other one which is great for me since I have a very short attention span.
Part 2:
This article discusses how well people trust sources of the media. First, the author delves into multiple statistics to illustrate that the majority of people trust the media more so than the government; however, the author then counteracts the survey by stating that the statistics are not valid. For example, the author mentions that over half of the surveyed people do not even know if they trust blogs or not. This evidence is very effective because it reveals that the majority of people are not even familiar with a lot of types of the media out there. Thus, when people make conclusions on whether they trust one type of the media, they are basing their decision off of their perception of that type of media instead of basing their decision on experience from dealing with it.
Secondly, the author points out that the mainstream media really affects people’s perceptions on other types of the media, such as people believing that blogs have no reliability. On the contrary, however, the author points out that this is not true because some blogs are credible. On the flip side, some are not credible. Thus, readers must look at articles or blogs individually in order to decide which ones are trustworthy. The author’s statements here are very logical. Even in the mainstream media some unreliable articles may emerge here or there. People must pick and choose what to trust in the media because making a generalization such as all blogs are corrupt is like making a stereotype and saying that all Mexicans are dirty.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment