[SALT] Sensationalism
Hello and welcome to the continuation of my semi-weekly [Debate] series and the first post under the (still somewhat experimental) tag of Sir ArmaMalum's Let's Talk. If this is your first time, welcome! The idea here is for me to present and outline a certain topic, complete with my own bit at the end, for the sole intent of talking about it. I tend to stick to out of game subjects like ethics, behavior and other such things but that doesn't mean I won't do them.
#####In fact, you can vote on next week's topic in the poll below.
Quick Guidelines on replies:
- Be constructive
- Ask questions wherever you can
- Be willing to be questioned yourself
http://i.imgur.com/Kg8n6Cd.png Sensationalism
###Sensationalism: noun (-shnə-ˌli-zəm, -shə-nə-ˌli-zəm)
the use of shocking details to cause a lot of excitement or interest
---Merriam-Webster Dictionary
In a raw sense, this is what Sensationalism is. Something to get you excited, something to stir your emotions to get you to keep reading/watching/listening. This term is contextually reserved for news and non-fiction areas because of it's use in the strategy of yellow journalism and exaggeration.
To be clear, Sensationalism in a literal sense isn't necessarily a bad thing. People get emotional, and in turn have a right to express that emotion through gripping details and curt word choice. But in practical, conscious use it's presence is a strategy to entice further reading. Which in turn leads to loss of accuracy, honesty and thought. Because one is not going to mention facts against your own point when on a tirade (or the illusion of one)
You can find a clear, basic examples of Sensationalism in modern (American at least) news today. i.e. "Up next, how this baby got trapped under a burning car. Tonight at 11:00 on...."
http://i.imgur.com/mASLEtZ.png Why mention it?
As you may have guessed, any casual internet forum will inevitably be riddled with sensationalism. It's a perfect storm of sensitive subjects, anonymity and lack of guidance/precedent. Even here in the league forums (Both CB + GD) Sensationalism can be seen everyday. If you've ever one day compared the league forums to something of a tabloid, with hyper exaggerated claims and screaming headlines then you're probably already well aware of this.
But there are a few focus points that I find particularly interesting and can possibly yield some interesting conversation.
####-----Emotional vs. Sensational
This is a rectangle vs square situation. A sensational post will almost always be emotional, as that's what it's trying to get out of you, the reader. An emotional post, however, is not always sensational. The key difference (among many) in my experience is one thing. Presentation of facts.
An emotional post can bring up important facts both for and against it's own argument and still be emotional in its own right. You don't have to be an eloquent monotone robot to have a good point.
Example: It's time -you- listen Riot- by Best Furry NA
But sensational posters will naturally cloud out details and lie by omission to get their way. It's a strategy of momentum. Any fact against their point or anything that slows down their race to your feelings will work against their play. Their's is not a side of logical conclusion but of emotional manipulation. Once you, the reader, are hooked into their half of the playing field their play worked without any or much real evidence to back them up.
####-----Identification
It's a bit hard sometimes to realize when you're reading or even writing a sensationalist piece. They can be subtle or just well-timed. For example, read the above paragraph again (the one starting with "But sensational posters..."). What if I had said something more like...
Sensationalism tends to avoid conflicting facts and logical arguments. It's a strategy that plays on the reader/viewers emotion to entice further reading and even a certain action.
I didn't have to say "posters", "their side", "lie", or "manipulation". Those are unnecessary flavor words that colored the paragraph's mood without actually changing the point itself. The argument was simply exaggerated, as many posts about LoL can be. Think of the average champion "plz nerf/buff" post. Chances are you could boil it down to "Please nerf/buff 'this' because 'this'" but it's rarely that simple is it? There's usually (imho) some mention of kit reliance or death of lane/jungle/assassin/etc. Champion "X" without their proposed balance tuning or revert. Next time you see one try to see if you can find any flavor words that try to push you somewhere. Just because some of these words are used doesn't mean it's a bad post, just think of whether or not that word had to be used there.
####Other flavor words examples: pointless, killed, implore, -any curse-, must, guaranteed, tyranny, demand, defend, need, ignorant, bronzies, noobs, eternity, useless, oppression, trash....
####-----Danger
Honestly, it can be very difficult to avoid sensationalism if you feel strongly about something. To some, it even comes naturally in their general writing. And it's not necessarily something to avoid either. But whether intended or not, productive or not, one thing that will always be a danger with sensationalism is facts. The natural progression of a sensationalist movement is to lessen the impact of facts/logic with an emotional response. Did you really want to know about the Mountain Lion attack in a park 1300 miles away you're never going to visit? Probably not, but chances are the average person will after they're told about it. Scale that up to a "hostage situation" that turned out to be a single drunk guy refusing to open his door to police or a nuclear (always the emphasis on nuclear) power plant shutting down going from a routine maintenance check to a "question of building security" and assumptions start being made which can lead to uninformed, biased decisions that may end up hurting people.
By the same extension, albeit not nearly as dramatic, forum posts here can be very influential if given enough visibility. Whether you want to or not you're affecting the people who read your writing, sometimes by tiny or massive leaps. Guiding even one person to uninformed decisions can lead to unnervingly bad consequences down the road. There are kids here, damnit. Keep that in mind the next time you decide to complain/praise a balance change or explain your thoughts on a subject.
http://i.imgur.com/IUjOisn.png Starting Line
What is your opinion on Sensationalism?
If you would like a more specific question(s)....
....Where have you seen Sensationalism in ample use?
....Can you think of any time you've used Sensationalism strategies?
....Can Sensationalism be useful? Examples for/against?
....How do you tell the difference between Emotional vs Sensational?
....Is there anything additional you would like to know about Sensationalism? (I'll help wherever I can)
These aren't required in any form, but may provide a good springboard for a great discussion. I look forward to conversing with you! But do be sure to read my 2 cents below on the off-chance I answered you're question already.
http://i.imgur.com/Lj4RQmz.png My $0.02
Honestly, I find sensationalism a bit of an oddity. I am a strong believer in the Socratic Method and by extension the classic phrase of "I know enough to know I know nothing" as well. I don't assume I know better than another, but I am far from impressionable. For me, asking questions is the best possible response to anything, because they'll either reveal a flaw in one's argument or instead strengthen it and have a greater chance of convincing me, in turn giving me a stronger stance if I decide to agree.
This happens to also be one of the best possible counters to sensationalism (imho). If I see a hole in an argument my first response is to question it. Not in an aggressive pre-determined way, but in a legitimately curious "please explain your point further" way. If the details/explanations don't exist, as sensationalism heavy arguments tend to be, then the entire argument crumbles behind it.
Ironically enough this also in turn makes it actually difficult to be sensational myself, as my take on a 'strong' argument is one that clearly, unabashedly, and unarguably gets a point across. This means as little biased and as many facts as I can manage. More than likely a few common questions as well. It's simply my thinking process. I even go back to random posts and try my best to read it 'blankly' and try to find unanswered questions within the subject that I could cover in an edit.
So I will say this: even after this post and everything in it, I don't understand Sensationalism. I just don't get it. I'm not saying I'm immune to it, but I find it almost entertainingly pointless and common. Growing up with JibJab, The Colbert Report, The Daily Show and other parodies of modern news practices probably didn't help much either....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q2EPKKVrqI&feature=kp
