Jessica Burbank and Spencer Brown react to news that Hunter Biden has been indicted. #HunterBiden #JoeBiden About Rising: Rising is a weekday morning show wi...
The medium is the message. How information is conveyed is part of the information. Employing click bait and “guache” methods is part of an “appeal to emotion,” and argument that riles up the passions instead of convincing with reason. Someone presenting information coached in tools designed to inflame or incite should indeed be suspect if they, on their face, are trying to convey largely “neutral” information like the news.
It is 100% imperative to analyze the value of an information source before and during use in order to prevent disinformation and propaganda. The original poster’s critique of the videos “style” is just that.
“The medium is the message” explains that the medium (eg: internet video) affects the message that is being created. It’s a lot more subtle than “ALL CAPS means DECEPTION”.
Also, they’re titles, not arguments. And again, it’s just capitalisation. The capitalisation does not make an argument. It makes an emphasis. Yes, it’s low-brow, but it’s not wrong. Hunter Biden was indeed INDICTED.
It is literally a superficial critique. You had to make a bunch of reaches to explain how the superficial critique could somehow become substantive, but you failed to do so.
And honestly, the real reason people like to shit on this kind of title is because it gives them a sense of superiority because they would never debase themselves with such low brow material. It’s worse than an appeal to emotion - it’s an appeal to faux intellectualism.
The medium is the message is not that cut and dry. All parts of the medium of any scope affect what’s said.
You can believe what you like about peoples “real reasons” but i would call the above guesswork that at best, reaffirms what you think people believe, not what they actually do.
It’s fascinating that you had nothing to say about the fact that titles aren’t arguments and that it is clearly a superficial critique.
Also, if you really think channels that do this aren’t worth paying attention to, I ask you to explain the vlogbrothers: MASSIVE Tuberculosis News
Now, maybe you won’t bother to explain them, because you think they’re not worth listening to because they CAPITALISED a word. Of course then I could tell you that they and their audience PRESSURED a pharmaceutical company into allowing their patent to lapse so MILLIONS of lives could be saved from TB.
Of course, that sentence may have been rendered UNREADABLE to you due to the GRATUITOUS capitalisation. I apologise, because otherwise it would’ve been ABSOLUTELY worth paying attention to, but now it’s RUBBISH.
Oh, I see. I thought you were referring to the post title.
Well, in that case the capitalisation is not random, it is done for emphasis. It may be a bit gauche but that is also not a substantive critique.
Also, capitalisation is a feature of grammar, so your complaint is still grammatical.
Its still a substantive critique.
The medium is the message. How information is conveyed is part of the information. Employing click bait and “guache” methods is part of an “appeal to emotion,” and argument that riles up the passions instead of convincing with reason. Someone presenting information coached in tools designed to inflame or incite should indeed be suspect if they, on their face, are trying to convey largely “neutral” information like the news.
It is 100% imperative to analyze the value of an information source before and during use in order to prevent disinformation and propaganda. The original poster’s critique of the videos “style” is just that.
“The medium is the message” explains that the medium (eg: internet video) affects the message that is being created. It’s a lot more subtle than “ALL CAPS means DECEPTION”.
Also, they’re titles, not arguments. And again, it’s just capitalisation. The capitalisation does not make an argument. It makes an emphasis. Yes, it’s low-brow, but it’s not wrong. Hunter Biden was indeed INDICTED.
It is literally a superficial critique. You had to make a bunch of reaches to explain how the superficial critique could somehow become substantive, but you failed to do so.
And honestly, the real reason people like to shit on this kind of title is because it gives them a sense of superiority because they would never debase themselves with such low brow material. It’s worse than an appeal to emotion - it’s an appeal to faux intellectualism.
The medium is the message is not that cut and dry. All parts of the medium of any scope affect what’s said.
You can believe what you like about peoples “real reasons” but i would call the above guesswork that at best, reaffirms what you think people believe, not what they actually do.
It’s fascinating that you had nothing to say about the fact that titles aren’t arguments and that it is clearly a superficial critique.
Also, if you really think channels that do this aren’t worth paying attention to, I ask you to explain the vlogbrothers: MASSIVE Tuberculosis News
Now, maybe you won’t bother to explain them, because you think they’re not worth listening to because they CAPITALISED a word. Of course then I could tell you that they and their audience PRESSURED a pharmaceutical company into allowing their patent to lapse so MILLIONS of lives could be saved from TB.
Of course, that sentence may have been rendered UNREADABLE to you due to the GRATUITOUS capitalisation. I apologise, because otherwise it would’ve been ABSOLUTELY worth paying attention to, but now it’s RUBBISH.