@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:"essential reading"
It really is a good read. It's an objective study of the role of the new and the traditional media in the '16 campaign. They lay out a well-sourced argument and provide plenty of graphs.
Quote:While concerns about political and media polarization online are longstanding, our study suggests that polarization was asymmetric. Pro-Clinton audiences were highly attentive to traditional media outlets, which continued to be the most prominent outlets across the public sphere, alongside more left-oriented online sites. But pro-Trump audiences paid the majority of their attention to polarized outlets that have developed recently, many of them only since the 2008 election season.
I don't see this sort of thinking as "political" or "ideologically motivated" and I think it's conclusions would be of interest to anyone interested in the way news is accessed and distributed today.
I see people attacking others on this thread for providing links to articles, studies, and essays and insinuating that only a lazy stooge without an original thought in his head would do this. But on a site like a2k where responses quickly get buried when a thread heats up it would be a waste of time to compose, research, and post an original piece of any length or substance. It's easier, more efficient, and more helpful to give a short review with a quote and provide a link. I don't know why this is seen as something to criticize — in fact I've wondered why more of the Republicans here don't provide links to articles of similar scope and depth — instead of obvious crap like
this.
Here are some guidelines on assessing the informational value of political articles which can be applied to writing from anywhere along the spectrum:
Quote:
1. Compare similarities and differences. The ability to compare similarities and differences among two or more objects, living things, ideas, events, or situations at the same or different points in time. Implies the ability to organize information into defined categories.
2. Identify central issues or problems. The ability to identify the main idea or point of a passage, argument, or political cartoon, for example. At the higher levels, students are expected to identify central issues in complex political arguments. Implies ability to identify major components of an argument, such as reasons and conclusions.
3. Distinguish fact from opinion. The ability to determine the difference between observation and inference.
4. Recognize stereotypes and cliches. The ability to identify fixed or conventional notions about a person, group, or idea.
5. Recognize bias, emotional factors, propaganda, and semantic slanting. The ability to identify partialities and prejudices in written and graphic materials. Includes the ability to determine credibility of sources (gauge reliability, expertise, and objectivity).
6. Recognize different value orientations and different ideologies. The ability to recognize different value orientations and ideologies.
7. Determine which information is relevant. The ability to make distinctions between verifiable and unverifiable, relevant and non-relevant, and essential and incidental information.
8. Recognize the adequacy of data. The ability to decide whether the information provided is sufficient in terms of quality and quantity to justify a conclusion, decision, generalization, or plausible hypothesis.
9. Check consistency. The ability to determine whether given statements or symbols are consistent. For example, the ability to determine whether the different points or issues in a political argument have logical connections or agree with the central issue.
10. Formulate appropriate questions. The ability to formulate appropriate and thought-provoking questions that will lead to a deeper and clearer understanding of the issues at hand.
11. Predict probable consequences. The ability to predict probable consequences of an event or series of events.
12. Identify unstated assumptions. The ability to identify what is taken for granted, though not explicitly stated, in an argument.
Excerpts from reading and writing for civic literacy