Why You Should Sample Ideas You Disagree with, and Be Skeptical of Celebrity Journalists

One of the great things about our country
and the way our Constitution was established is that we have a marketplace of ideas. That means that people can shop for those
ideas that they want to hear. My hope is that more people would want to
shop for a variety of products; ones that come from a lot of different suppliers, ones
that have a lot of different ideas and perceptions and perspectives and facts and experiences
that are shared. But we live in a country where you’re free
to get whatever you want. And if you want to shop on a side where it’s
only one type of product that’s giving you one vision, you have the right to do that
and that’s not for me to tell anyone not to do that. It would be unfortunate, I think, if people
limit themselves because they do care and are interested in the consumption of news. I think it’s really important to try to be
able to search for different outlets and for different opportunities to learn more and
to educate yourselves. One of the things with our practice over the
years has been working with clients who have very different political views. They weren’t necessarily mine; I have clients
who are way more liberal than me and I have clients who are way more conservative than
me. We only work on things politically that we
agree with, but we work with clients whose politics we may not, because being around
people and having discussions and learning about them and appreciating and respecting
the points of view that they have, is really valuable for us to understand how to reach
people, how to understand things, and truthfully I think it makes us better people—a little
bit—by the fact that we try it. It doesn’t mean you’re a bad person if you
don’t, but I think that the more understanding you have of your neighbor the more you have
the ability to find common interests. And if you can find those common interests
then you’ll have a lot more respect for the differences afterwards, and hopefully when
you do go shopping you can find at least a few things on that shopping list that your
neighbor, who may have different politics than you, would agree with, at least find
a few things they agree with because that could then help you talk about the things
you disagree with. And at least if we could start somewhere the
same and then build out from there—and in order to do that you have to sometimes taste-test
some things that you may not be used to tasting. We live in an era where individuals are brands
of themselves and that does not just apply to athletes or to actors, it also applies
to journalists. And we’ve come into an era with celebrity
journalists who are journalists who are more trusted, especially in days where people have
questions about some things about the media. And one of the things that you’ve seen in
the past was that people would specifically just want a story based on what publication
had the story as opposed to necessarily who was going to write it. Now, because we have journalists who are more
trusted, who do have Twitter followers, who do have larger influence and a way to be able
to be followed potentially by others, there’s going to be a consideration about that reach
that goes beyond simply the outlet, it goes to the individual. In addition, the standards that an individual
reporter may have may be higher or lower than that of the publication for which they’re
working. In some cases the reporter, as I mentioned,
is above the standards of the publication that they work for, if it’s a more tabloid-type
environment where the standards are a little bit different, and others where you even have
the highest and most respected publications—sometimes their standards aren’t exactly what you think
they are, and the reporters who approach things aren’t up to those standards and so you just
need to be careful and consider both.

  1. This is a great point but the question is how to enable this wider sampling of ideas and make it available to the masses. With so much news consumed via social media, creators of recommendation algorithms and curators of ranking systems have a great responsibility. Why is it that YouTube is all but showing me similar views to things I have been watching? I would love to have a button that would flip my preferences when I am feeling lucky.

  2. The fact is, the structure of government will have to be overhauled in the coming years. The present structure is antiquated in an overpopulated society.

  3. You can prove people wrong time after time but you'll never change their mind. They simply try harder to prove you wrong.

  4. I always tell this to people. But they always say basically "Yeaahh.. no. I'm not going to listen to these <slur>s."

  5. become a journalist and your reporting news will be controlled by big money media.
    truth becomes fiction, reliable sources become fictitious and revenue climbs as more sheeple watch what is broadcast.

  6. There is no marketplace of ideas. There's a very strict overton window. For example, the deep state made it almost impossible for Americans to talk about socialism from the Cold War until only a few years ago even though America had a thriving socialist movement before World War II.

  7. NOPE. Everyone I disagree with on even ONE issue is a literal Nazi and I hate them with all the vitriol I can muster. IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO!

  8. Everything sucks, everybody lies, and everybody has an agenda. Fuck progressives/liberals, fuck conservatives, fuck anarchists.
    Nihilism and absorbing (((nobody's))) opinion is the only thing that seems sensible.
    Think for yourself.

  9. If you believe anything a Celebrity tells you, without doing your own research, you are a pure bred fuckpotato. And you should be purged.

  10. Pretty shallow and weak for a "public relations veteran". One notch above teletubbies level (CNN, MSDNC, NYT, WaPo etc).
    If Americans were allowed to know the truth about their own country without being labeled "conspiracy theorists" all hell would break loose. Further, if they were allowed to vote for real alternatives things would start changing.
    Talk about public relations, corporate, deep state stranglehold on programming and orchestrated framing of issues.

  11. If you would like the civilization to change around you, it seems to me that you should firstly start by changing yourself within, which goes for everyone on the planet including myself. I understand that is a tall order, but until society evolves to levels that are more intricate individually but as a whole within it just will not happen. I mean the peace and everything associated with it that you are constantly looking for under your own set of external rules that seems to change with the next people to come into existence.

  12. The bi-polar nature of two party politics is inherently reductionist in choice – it is only one party better than a dictatorship.

  13. I'm pretty skeptical of the promotion of fake news just to push an agenda. Really undermines and sows distrust in whatever argument you're trying to make. I like to think that I'm loyal to truth, and I have an allergic reaction to the peddling of lies.

  14. Interesting message, while the google and face book and Patron are trying to sensor right leaning ideas.

  15. You cannot trust corporate media. They're loyalty does not lie with us, but the to the corporate interests currently tearing the the middle and working classes to pieces.

  16. People don't shop for different ideas like they were products. Humans are tribal. Confirmation bias is powerful. It requires substantial willpower, and critical thinking to overcome it. Most people are short on at least one.

  17. I hope what people really take away from this discussion in the broader sense is that there is no substituting learning how the world really works.
    Get a good grasp of physics, geography, sociology, history, biology and neurology and you are far less likely to be led astray by everyday political agendas and see the real picture. Often the larger, more uncomfortable picture. But at least you can trust that the vote you lay for which leader/political party is a more informed one. And not because you are following a certain party line or person.

  18. I consider myself a "moderate libertarian" so liberals think I'm super conservative and conservatives think I'm super liberal. It's fun.

  19. So many people are caught up in the concept of "don't say anything if it isn't nice", that they forget bad news is actually nice to know.

    Can't fix anything nor work towards anything when you only create constant failures that are loved so much, that they become re-labeled as winners.

    Not everyone of us wants to know what the hell is going on around us, because they are wimps who can't handle the truth!

    Are we simply a micro-verse powering some larger beings space car? Are we accidents from a star that exploded it's enriched guts? Did a Deity cause it? Are aliens here?

    I'm pretty fucking damn sure I wouldn't freak out or harm anything if I simply knew what the fuck is going on but everyone has these fucking agenda's that are trying to fuck your head up for lobbyists to get votes swayed it feels like!

  20. The "marketplace of ideas" is a tortured metaphor. It is overused and was never a great fit to begin with. Nevertheless, it is applicable in some situations, and this is one of them. Ideological narrow-mindedness is the scourge of our society, and it's incumbent upon all of us to be vigilant against it.

  21. No one wants to be selectively informed while staying loyal. Feeding sitted truth that had been selected to disinform loyal public is a crime. Especially if it used against 50% of the rest of population that voted for different party. Shining light on one white cat in the dark room doesn't change others.

  22. You want to sample reasonable alternative positions to yours. You want to call out and debunk bad ideas. He assumes reasonable common ground exists… that is easy. If people (or yourself) did not reach a position through analysis and reason . Using a reasoned argument in a discussion will likely make no difference. If people cannot agree on what is evidence vs opinion or what is a fact, you will not find agreement. In a world where people can separate themselves in social media groups that use their own brand of reason and facts common ground is difficult to come by.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *