Saturday, February 17, 2007

Words' Worth?

Today I have already watched and read two separate items that got a bit under my skin with the way people in the news say things that really are less than accurate, or substantiated, and the news outlets that allow such messages to go out.

First up is an enduring one, usually spouted by a pol or other spokesperson pitching or defending something under the spotlight; 'The [name social, racial, local, ethnic, national, etc, group here] want/are calling for, etc [this action, inaction, positive, negative, etc].

Er, no. I wasn't asked. And didn't offer any such view. So how do I suddenly get told I am supporting this? My immediate reaction is to rebel. Don't do it. Pitch on the basis of fact and reason.

Next is more topical: ' The climate debate is over'. Er, no, it patently is not. And trying to shut it down in this way is silly. There are still a horde of 'deniers' keeping it going well and truly, and denying this is just playing into their hands.

Find another way of phrasing to persuade those who do not live and breathe the day and night twists of the whole issue. Quick!

No comments: