So unless you’ve been in a hole hidden away from media and society, you’ll know that politics is a hot button issue in the social media world. Every few posts I see on my Facebook news feed is either pro or anti Trump, or extreme liberal or conservative. These posts are often met with what I’ll call “radical views” (not actually that radical but somewhat devisive views) and comments. I enjoy reading them from time to time as they sometimes are amusing to hear banter and read the various viewpoints of my friends. The thing that bothers me more often than not is when people debate but back their facts with extremely biased sites. I’m all for debate and discussion and I do see the need to back your arguments with facts but it doesn’t really support your cause if you’re using biased media outlets like Breitbart, the Blaze or Slate and the New Yorker. The reason for this is that the articles and opinions on those sites are incredibly bias.
Why does this matter? Facts are facts right? Well yes and no. Yes facts are facts, but not entirely. For example, if I’m looking at the world through my blue tinted sunglasses, I could look at something yellow and say it’s green, or something red and say it’s purple. Does that make what I see wrong? Perhaps but let’s apply this to the whole liberal/conservative issue. If I watch the Colbert report and see a clip that says Trump is a moron for appointing Betsy DeVos as the secretary of Education and reasons to show why that’s the case, if I had a liberal bias that would just reaffirm my own personal beliefs and then I would share it and think, that’ll teach those conservatives. Conversely if I as a conservative then saw something on Breitbart telling me that the Colbert report is stupid because of these reasons, I would feel justified in thinking that my views were right to begin with and Betsy DeVos should be secretary of Education because she’s the best suited for it (I personally don’t care – I’m Canadian). Biased views will produce bias opinions and it’s easy to find bias in research and statistics if you’re looking hard enough.
Now you might be asking why should this matter? Well if you care for facts and truth then it should matter where you gather your facts or “alternative facts” as it may be. It doesn’t support your cause in trying to change views or opinions, if that is indeed your point in posting anything like this. Yes it’s nice to be on the winning team from time to time but really when you post something from a bias media outlet you frequent and support it just seems like a huge circle jerk.
I guess what I’m trying to get at here is that there needs to be a way to bridge the gap between the two sides. People need to be more open to understanding and open to civil conversation. I understand that often people go into conversations under the pretense that they’ll be civil but when you go swinging arguments using your biased media outlets articles, you’re not looking for a civil open conversation. You want an all out brawl guns a blaze, because that’s exactly how those outlets write their articles. They hope to incite anger and cause contention because that is the very fuel that keeps them going, taking all of their passengers along for the Blazing ride down Slate road watching the world burn down around them.