Especially fine writing this week, Rex. I wonder if it would be too social sciencey, or if your readers might be interested in knowing a bit about how some thinkers break partially free of motivated reasoning. And whether that knowledge could provide hints about political reform, as well as hints for journalists trying to assist in the increase of less biased reasoning?
Good thought. Some researchers actually have pursued that question, and I will come to it in a later post of The Upstate American. (You know, I usually write too long, I think, so I didn't want to take that space to include it in the latest essay.)
Short term, for those who have no ethical or moral compass, there’s nothing to lose from reckless disregard for the truth. In the end, effective litigation. Is likely the only path to not only halting this, but to unveiling the truth, for those willing to see it.
I think the name is Haruki Murakami? Finding fellow travelers to the land of make-believe in the media silos of the Land of Oz also encourages people to believe against evidence. Where do journalistic standards come from, and where are they going? Sorry about the painfully mixed metaphor. It is early.
Thanks, Mr. Koester! For later readers, I fixed the error that offended, and a couple of typos at the end of the dispatches, which got through my bleary-eyed copy editing.
Yes, Rex. A typical ad hominem attack on the right, without substance. What's the Hoosier remark about? Correcting typos has to do with fact checking, so I suppose Mr. Molon need not concern himself with them, since facts don't enter into his puerile name calling.
Especially fine writing this week, Rex. I wonder if it would be too social sciencey, or if your readers might be interested in knowing a bit about how some thinkers break partially free of motivated reasoning. And whether that knowledge could provide hints about political reform, as well as hints for journalists trying to assist in the increase of less biased reasoning?
Good thought. Some researchers actually have pursued that question, and I will come to it in a later post of The Upstate American. (You know, I usually write too long, I think, so I didn't want to take that space to include it in the latest essay.)
Short term, for those who have no ethical or moral compass, there’s nothing to lose from reckless disregard for the truth. In the end, effective litigation. Is likely the only path to not only halting this, but to unveiling the truth, for those willing to see it.
I think the name is Haruki Murakami? Finding fellow travelers to the land of make-believe in the media silos of the Land of Oz also encourages people to believe against evidence. Where do journalistic standards come from, and where are they going? Sorry about the painfully mixed metaphor. It is early.
Wow. Molon’s comment is Uncivil, tangential, and (in my eyes) unwelcome in this forum.
Mr Molon: It seems you have latched on to a typo, making it the proverbial “mountain out of a mole hill.”
Mr Smith: “Keep on keeping on”.
Thanks, Mr. Koester! For later readers, I fixed the error that offended, and a couple of typos at the end of the dispatches, which got through my bleary-eyed copy editing.
Yes, Rex. A typical ad hominem attack on the right, without substance. What's the Hoosier remark about? Correcting typos has to do with fact checking, so I suppose Mr. Molon need not concern himself with them, since facts don't enter into his puerile name calling.