Always Question The Premise

Straightforward and objective reporting of events has nearly vanished from the evening news and it is questionable whether it ever really existed for the 24 hour "news" networks. Nearly everyone across the broad spectrum of partisan interests seems to be intent on "shaping" or "framing" the news rather than reporting it. In my distant youth, that would have been called "lying".

The first step in the shaping process has always been present: the selection of which stories will be reported. In days past, this process was dictated almost entirely by time constraints. Since there was not time to cover all the news within the allotted time slot, some selection or culling was required. Generally, what was judged to be the "most important" news was covered by TV and the "less important" stories were left to newspapers to develop.

The selection process is still alive and well, but with very different motivation, it seems. Today, stories which favor "us" (whoever a given network deems that to be) or show "them" in an unfavorable light are featured, often loudly and repetitively, while news stories that do not advance the network's corporate political agenda are spiked.

When listening to these opinion pieces veiled as news ("We report. You decide."),you will often hear long impassioned harangues which are almost entirely dependent uupon the first sentence or two spoken, the "premise" of the piece.

"Many reputable scientists strongly disagree with the entire notion that global warming is caused my man."

Is that sentence even arguably true? Of course not! WE know that, but how could "less involved" TV viewers even try to evaluate it? Names? Credentials? Quotes?

Yet, with that premise as their linch pin, some commentators will construct an opinion piece that brands the entire complicated issue of global climate change as a "liberal hoax". Similarly,---

"Some say---" WHO? If they can't be named they usually shouldn't be quoted.

"It's been reported---" BY WHOM? WHERE?

"We all know---" REALLY?

"As the Bible tells us---" ARE YOU SERIOUS?

These little "lead-ins" seem to transparently simple minded when we actually consider them. But, of course, a lot of money and psychology have been invested in rushing us PAST the premise without permitting any questioning of it.

If we allow ourselves to be "herded" past an often embarrassingly flawed premise, we could find ourselves believing all manner of lies and exaggerations. Iraq's participation in 9-11 and its possession of "weapons of mass destruction" come to mind.

Depending on the speaker or the author, we sometimes extend the "benefit of the doubt" regarding their premise. That's OK, so long as we are doing it consciously and not just sliding past it to get to the "meat" of their comment. But, no one should get a pass. Eventually, we should insist that everyone "put up or shut up". And, yes, that most definitely includes me.

While this is clearly my opinon and I've made no pretense of being "fair and balanced", who the hell am I?

Have I played fast and loose with the truth? Have I leaped to unsupported conclusions or made unwarranted assumptions?

You can, and should, evaluate what I've said by using your own life experience, common sense and, perhaps, your sense of smell. But, we should subject the talking heads to that same healthy skepticism.

Always Question The Premise.

on any true/false question

or as i like to call them, "O'Reilly questions" is:

i do not agree with your premise.