Language in the Media - The Mueller Report

April 22, 2019

The recent release of the long-awaited Mueller report brought mixed reviews. Many conservatives viewed the report as the finalization in the "collusion" debate and the ultimate proof of Trump's exoneration. Democrats, on the other hand, delved into the 500 page investigation and determined that Muller's verdict was a result of something much less flattering. Because most Americans do not have the time or energy to pick through the very in-depth and heavily-redacted report, the positive or negative spin presented by the media heavily influenced the reader's perception of it.

A Fox News article titled "Tulsi Gabbard: Mueller report found 'no collusion took place,' Dems shouldn't push to impeach Trump," praises the Mueller report as a herald of truth in a world of fake news. It several times uses Trump's own rhetoric of "no collusion" to reinforce their support of them. The article later continues, "Now is the time for us to come together as a country to put the issues and the interests and the concerns that the American people have at the forefront, to take action to bring about real solutions for them." This transition to the future emphasizes how the right views the Mueller report as the book end to dark and complicated era. To them the report signifies the beginning of a bright new future, one without the messy liberal lies about the Russia investigation.

On the other hand, the Washington Post article titled "Mueller’s findings: Too stupid to conspire. Too incompetent to obstruct," took a different interpretation. This article characterizes Mueller's conclusion to mean "With all the documentation of Russian collusion piling up, President Trump’s best excuse may be that his people were too incompetent to organize a conspiracy. Luckily for him, an innocent-­by-reason-of-stupidity defense has the virtue of being plausible." Instead of praising the president for not overtly breaking the law (like the Fox News article does), the Washington Post uses it as an opportunity to further criticize the competency of Trump and his team. 

The differing representations surrounding the release of the Mueller report illustrates how partisanship interacts with media. Most news sources have political biases that influence the way they interpret and present current events to their readers. In the face of this, as a reader, it is important to recognize these biases and be skeptical of what we read.

Mueller’s findings: Too stupid to conspire. Too incompetent to obstruct

Tulsi Gabbard: Mueller report found 'no collusion took place,' Dems shouldn't push to impeach Trump

The NRA's Financial Mess

April 22, 2019

Recently I listened to an episode of the New Yorker Radio Hour titled "The NRA's Financial Mess". Reflecting upon it presented me with an interesting and unexpected conundrum. The podcast was largely an interview with Aaron Davis, a former employee at the National Rifle Association. Davis, who worked for nearly a decade in the fund-raising department, offered valuable insight into the internal operations of the historic and highly controversial corporation. The story begins with the NRA's long time contractor, Ackerman McQueen. The Oklahoma-based marketing company had become inextricably intertwined with the non-profit organization over the past three decades. Ackerman executives had offices in NRA buildings and were de facto bosses of Davis's entire department. They oversaw and directed all advertisement campaigns and marketing projects. It wasn't until 2017 that the problems with this relationship became apparent. Ackerman McQueen had infiltrated so far into the daily working of the NRA that their influence was almost absolute. It was then discovered that the for-profit marketing company had diverted the non-profit funds raised by the organization towards its personal enrichment. The NRA is now in a lawsuit with the company for their nefarious mismanagement. This misappropriation of money made a tremendous dent in the association. The NRA had to cut many programs and in March, Wayne LaPierre, the NRA's top executive, sent a desperate letter to the organization's members begging for money.

In almost any other context, I would feel empathy for the non-profit association being screwed over by the embezzlement of the big corporate marketing conglomerate. But then the end of the podcast reminded me who the protagonist in this saga is. Aaron Davis eventually quit his job due to ethical disagreements with the NRA. Specifically, he cited the association's unapologetic and disrespectful response to the Sandy Hook mass shooting as an example of the cruel and inhumane ideology the NRA displays. This reminder put the story in a new light. I was confused as to how I should respond. Who should I root for? The producer of killing machines? The greedy capitalist enterprise? I was at a loss. I don't know why I felt the compulsive need to take sides, but my inability to do so struck me. Ultimately, I decided that if they were both evil, it kind of all balanced out in the end.

The New Yorker Radio Hour - The NRA's Financial Mess

Introduction - My Relationship With Media

April 11, 2019

My relationship with media is one I am heavily reliant on. I, along with most members of our society, am constantly inundated with information. We are relentlessly bombarded with advertisements, news, opinions, and distractions. Even as I write this now I am simultaneously listening to music, checking my phone, looking at social media, and compulsively refreshing the other tabs open on my computer. Because media has permeated every aspect of my life, I am extremely dependent on it. I have become accustomed to such a high level of consumption that I am very aware of the absence of media in my life. This I believe to be due in part by the digitalization of media (which I'm sure we all remember from "Digital Nation" :) Although seemingly quite depressing, this relationship is not always negative. In fact, I think there are many educational and beneficial operationalizations of media. I can easily identity both a positive and negative example of media in my life.

First, the banal one: social media. The most crushing realization of my teenage years so far has been coming to grips with the fact that all the old people harping about kids and social media are actually correct. Despite how annoying it is, they are right, to an extent, about the effects of social media on this generation. I use Instagram and Snapchat very frequently. Of course, social media is very useful for communicating with others. For example, the convenience of Snapchat has allowed me to remain in contact with friends I have met through debate who live all over the country. But it is obvious that the addictive nature of it outweighs this small benefit. Social media is literally re-wiring our brains and operates on the same neurological pathways as addictive drugs. It dominates our interpersonal relationships and often replaces genuine connections between people. Social media's recent confluence with the news has posed an even more complex problem. For example, it is widely believed that the 2016 presidential election was greatly influenced by the spreading of "fake news" through platforms such as Facebook and Twitter. Additionally, social media allows people to tailor and distort what other people see of them. This creates idealized and unrealistic expectations that have a severe impact on peoples' perceptions of themselves.

One of my positive relationships with media is a result of my participation in debate. The nature of the activity requires the reading, processing, and analyzing of thousands of "cards" (excerpts of evidence such as news articles and academic journals.) This practice I have found to be exceptionally educational. My interaction with media in this way ensures that I remain informed about current events and am well-versed in politics and philosophy. It also necessitates that I utilize credible sources and think critically and deliberately about the content. As opposed to my relationship with social media wherein I mindlessly consume information haphazardly, debate requires a more in-depth and formal interaction with media.

My life is structured and cohered by media. Some instances of it are detrimental while others I find valuable. Because media's existence is ultimately inevitable, it is my task to increase the positive examples of it and decrease the negative ones.