I am an independent voter but I must say that anything in the television/radio media that is to the far right actually curls my toes! The vibration of that energy seems like such an affront - a physical shove! I can’t listen to any kind of yelling or forceful tone, I have to get out of the vicinity fast. I also feel that with a lot of the heavy metal music and hard hitting rap. I’m hyper sensitive. It would be an interesting experiment to have the same loudness but the message be uplifting and inclusive. Would I still feel the energetic offense?
I think what’s important is how anger takes over and can feel like truth telling when it’s not. It replaces reason and thoughtful discussion. I see it in court and what’s really scary is that it often works. Judges fall for the angry, outraged advocate over and over again when there’s no truth to support it.
Fascinating insight. I have noticed that when I need to make a point, I get a bit more dramatic and emotional in the way I communicate. It's not always purely about trying to persuade my audience, but regardless, I think your observation is spot-on.
Me too. Thanks for posting. I wish the article was a bit more politically neutral, but I still agree with the main idea. I think that MSNBC and Huffington Post are also making people into angry maniacs. And yes, “addiction” is the appropriate word.
I'm unsure if politically neutral is the ideal value to go for though in journalism. It's a bit of an extreme comparison to make, but when Edward R. Murrow commented on the atrocities he saw in Buchenwald on its liberation in 1945, he didn't weigh the pros and cons of the war crimes he saw. Instead, he said it was an atrocity for which he 'Had no words'.
I like what Julia Angwin from the Markup has to say about 'scientific journalism' as in you present a hypothesis, research it to see if it's true, and then come back with the conclusions for good or ill.
Yes. Very smart comment. I agree completely. Most of the people I’m close to seem more attached to liberal media than conservative media. But yeah, neutral would be a horrible ideal value because it’s impossible to define and measure.
I am an independent voter but I must say that anything in the television/radio media that is to the far right actually curls my toes! The vibration of that energy seems like such an affront - a physical shove! I can’t listen to any kind of yelling or forceful tone, I have to get out of the vicinity fast. I also feel that with a lot of the heavy metal music and hard hitting rap. I’m hyper sensitive. It would be an interesting experiment to have the same loudness but the message be uplifting and inclusive. Would I still feel the energetic offense?
I agree 100%.
We should ALL read this. Right, left and center.
I think what’s important is how anger takes over and can feel like truth telling when it’s not. It replaces reason and thoughtful discussion. I see it in court and what’s really scary is that it often works. Judges fall for the angry, outraged advocate over and over again when there’s no truth to support it.
Fascinating insight. I have noticed that when I need to make a point, I get a bit more dramatic and emotional in the way I communicate. It's not always purely about trying to persuade my audience, but regardless, I think your observation is spot-on.
Very intriguing, would love to read more of the scientific literature on this.
Me too. Thanks for posting. I wish the article was a bit more politically neutral, but I still agree with the main idea. I think that MSNBC and Huffington Post are also making people into angry maniacs. And yes, “addiction” is the appropriate word.
I'm unsure if politically neutral is the ideal value to go for though in journalism. It's a bit of an extreme comparison to make, but when Edward R. Murrow commented on the atrocities he saw in Buchenwald on its liberation in 1945, he didn't weigh the pros and cons of the war crimes he saw. Instead, he said it was an atrocity for which he 'Had no words'.
I like what Julia Angwin from the Markup has to say about 'scientific journalism' as in you present a hypothesis, research it to see if it's true, and then come back with the conclusions for good or ill.
Yes. Very smart comment. I agree completely. Most of the people I’m close to seem more attached to liberal media than conservative media. But yeah, neutral would be a horrible ideal value because it’s impossible to define and measure.