Old 07-12-2006, 09:59 PM   #1
talisman
Resident Penguin
FFR Simfile AuthorFFR Veteran
 
talisman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Age: 34
Posts: 4,598
Send a message via AIM to talisman
Default John Stossel

carrying over from garbage bin.

Like I said there, I don't disagree with all that he says. I also am not personally qualified/knowledgeable (nor do I doubt is anyone on ffr) to agree/disagree knowledgeably with some of his positions.

My main beef with stossel is really his whole style in general. I grant him the right to do what he does the way he does it, but it infuriates me that people might be taking him more seriously than they ought to because of that right. Stossel is an accusative and cavalier journalist. Rather than sitting in between two or more opposing sides of an issue and researching either side, Stossel prefers to pick one side and (selectively?) research that. The only airtime he gives to the opposing viewpoint is what the people he's interviewing say, and in this way he can control (by his line of questioning) not only what the interviewee can say, but also, and more importantly, what the audience sees and (via Stossel's own narrative voice-overs) how they should feel about it, rather than letting them decide for themselves. And really, I think what I can't stomach about him most is just that: his overt manipulation of the audience. I know it's allowed, I know there's nothing that can stop him, I just flat out hate it, on principle.

Anyway.

Here's some specific things I've found that I really hate. This is from abc's website from a promo for his book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Stossel
Myth No. 3 — Guns are Bad
Ok. So it seems that what he's saying is that it's a myth that guns are bad. Fine. So now he has to show that the perception of guns as bad is incorrect. Perhaps he will say that guns are not in fact bad, but good. That might be one way to show that guns are not bad, and therefore that it's a myth that they are. Perhaps he will find another way. Let's see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Stossel
America is notorious for its culture of gun violence. Guns sometimes do cause terrible harm, and many kids are killed every year in gun accidents. But public service announcements and news stories make it seem as if the accidents kill thousands of kids every year.
Is America really notorious for its culture of gun violence? I don't know, I guess it might. Chances are that the rest of the public is with me. Little meaningless transitional statements like this serve only to perpetuate the media stereotypes Stossel likes to fight, in reality. But let's move on.

Next a concession, fair. And then he accuses the media of exaggerating these deaths, fair enough as well, although sources would be nice. Still nothing about why guns aren't bad. Or am I to believe that guns don't become bad until they kill thousands of kids instead of just a few? I don't think so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Stossel
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, however, fewer than 100 kids 15 and under are killed in gun accidents every year. Of course that's horrible, and I understand why demonstrators say we need more gun control.
Ah he's anticipated my criticism and suitably deflected. And now gun control has been mentioned. Is he going to be criticizing gun control? I thought this was about why it's a myth that guns are bad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Stossel
But guess what? The Centers for Disease Control recently completed a review of studies of various types of gun control: background checks, waiting periods, bans on certain guns and ammunition. It could not document that these rules have reduced violent crime.
Oh, so he is going to be criticizing gun control. More importantly, he's saying that it's ineffective. Well that's ok I suppose. But why is it a myth that guns are bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Stossel
The government wants to say things like the Brady Gun Control Law are making a difference, but they aren't. Some maximum security felons I spoke to in New Jersey scoffed at measures like the Brady law. They said they'll have no trouble getting guns if they want them.

A Justice Department study confirmed what the prisoners said. But get this: the felons say that the thing they fear the most is not the police, not time in prison, but, you, another American who might be armed.

It's a reason many states are passing gun un-control. They're allowing citizens to carry guns with them; it's called concealed carry or right to carry. Some women say they're comforted by these laws.

Many people are horrified at the idea of concealed carry laws, and predict mayhem if all states adopt these laws.

But surprise, 36 states already have concealed carry laws, and not one reported an upsurge in gun crime.
Now we finally get to the main point. Or do we? Why is it a myth that guns are bad? Ok, maybe it's a myth that concealed carry laws are bad. But that doesn't necessarily mean that guns themselves aren't "bad". Maybe they are, maybe they aren't, the point is that Stossel has posited a thesis he doesn't support only in order to grab his audience's attention. Wrong? Morally, I think so.

Also, notice how he reduces things to simplistic generalities. "Some" women... who? "Many" people... how many? So ok, none of the states reported an upsurge in gun crime. What about accidental gun deaths caused from kids finding their parents' weapons? Seems like an important question to me that he leaves unanswered.

And are the felons in maximum security facilities really the authoritative source that the Brady Gun Control Law is ineffective?

And what about a potential solution? Should we have no gun control or background checks? Should everyone carry their own weapons? What?

Second piece of evidence I'll cite is this piece ripping his anti-organic foods piece. This is fairly well publicized, but basically what happened is John Stossel lied and falsely reported scientific data that made it seem like non-organic food didn't have any pesticide residue on it, when all the researchers tested for was bacteria residue, not pesticide residue. Stossel was actually eventually forced to publically apologize for this. Here's one old link dealing with it: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1727

I'm too tired now to go into his dismissal of global warming. perhaps tomorrow.

To summarize: I dislike John Stossel for his brazen approach to journalism that sacrifices a careful and balanced approach to stories for one that is sensationalistic, accusatory and self-glorifying. There's alot wrong with the media, and people like Stossel, supposedly advocates for the people, aren't helping by such unprofessionalism. It becomes less about telling the truth and more about telling a story (something, ironically, that Stossel himself complains about). Yet instead of playing to the audience's fear, he plays to their sense of indignation, makes them seem like they've had blinders over their eyes and that he's going to show them the truth, and for that the audience places their trust in him. And sometimes he may well be telling the truth. Yet sometimes it might just be his interpretation. And sometimes it might just be flat out wrong, like with the organic produce. He represents, to me, at least, the worst kind of journalism: the kind that thinks it's on the side of the audience but in reality is an affront to their intelligence by sacrificing any wholehearted attempt at balanced reporting.
talisman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2006, 10:13 AM   #2
talisman
Resident Penguin
FFR Simfile AuthorFFR Veteran
 
talisman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Age: 34
Posts: 4,598
Send a message via AIM to talisman
Default Re: John Stossel

aw chardish I make this whole topic for you and no response? I'm so hurt.
talisman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2006, 11:11 PM   #3
The_Q
FFR Player
 
The_Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Age: 31
Posts: 4,391
Send a message via AIM to The_Q Send a message via Yahoo to The_Q
Default Re: John Stossel

Talk to me personally on this one. I want to defend my party member as best I can personally.
The_Q is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2006, 07:28 PM   #4
talisman
Resident Penguin
FFR Simfile AuthorFFR Veteran
 
talisman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Age: 34
Posts: 4,598
Send a message via AIM to talisman
Default Re: John Stossel

oh... I don't think I have enough indignant out rage right now.
talisman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2006, 10:34 PM   #5
Omeganitros
auauauau
FFR Veteran
 
Omeganitros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hee-Haw!
Age: 31
Posts: 8,899
Send a message via AIM to Omeganitros
Default Re: John Stossel

I don't even know who this here John feller is, but talisman's view sure is convincing that this John is a bad guy.

I reckon.
Omeganitros is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution