Manjoo

    Let me start off by saying, I am always skeptical about what I hear on the news or read in the paper. Everyone has their own opinion even if they say they don’t. There is always two sides to a story, his-hers-and the truth. To form your own opinion you would have to look at both sides and then decide on your own what the truth is. With technology today it is getting a lot harder to do this. So-called journalist can post anything on the web and if you want to believe you can but is it the truth?

     Farhad Manjoo wrote “True Enough”, and explored why hardnosed journalism is no more.  Manjoo gave examples of Kathy Dopp and the presidential mistake, the Swift Boat Veterans, “truthiness” and peripheral processing.

    I found the Swift Boat Veterans story to be quite entertaining. These veterans believed that John Kerry had not done half of what he said. Even though they were not reporters or journalist they were able to spread their views and thoughts. They were able to get backing finically which allowed them to reach national levels. This furthers proves the point that anybody can reach the mass public. I believe the same tactic was used during the 2008 election. Many people were distraught over Obama possibly being president. They tried every trick in the book to attempt to get the America population to vote against him.

     The Kathy Dopp story emphasized the power one person can have. Dopp, a mathematician who is an election observer, noticed an irregularity in the Florida results. It ultimately turned out that there was not an irregularity, but it showed what power one person can have when they notice something wrong. Dopp posted all of her findings to the web and even had charts that prompted the question, “Is it possible to rig op-scan voting systems?” The web was able to make Dopp, essentially, an amateur reporter; she told us what she thought the experts weren’t.

    This brings me to my next point, Experts. Experts are no longer experts in a field they are experts in delivering a message. In a sense this is good and bad for news reporters. The good way is for the power hungry reporters who think they can say whatever they want and the public will believe them…the bad part is that people who know this trick will not tune in and instead go somewhere where they can get more “expert” news.

    This goes into peripheral processing. This is where people who may be lazy at the time or don’t know anything about a subject will turn to “Consumer Reports”. The book said, “How often are Consumer Reports wrong about some product endorsement?” This is where it gets confusing in my eyes. Think about how many times an average person might look for advice on everyday items. What is they can’t find a Consumer Report on the item they are looking for? What if the Consumer Report they find differs from a blog they read? These are the questions that could alter someone’s peripheral processing.

    “Truthiness” is what is known as two parts one is those who “think with their head” and the others are those who “know with their heart.” This occurs everywhere. A part of truthiness is that people may believe a story just because it may feel right even though there is lack of evidence to prove it. “Truthiness” took off, a person of expertise was able to come up with this term and let it ride.  It’s the power people have over the public. If they say it with confidence and meaning and people have to same views they will accept it.

    The future is coming and with that journalism is changing and it may not be for the good. We are all going to have to adjust to the new age of journalism. It is our job to sort through the junk and deliver the actual facts to the public. The biggest challenge is to not get sucked into the technology that is toxic to journalism.