Comments on: Politico http://www.richardmondello.com/2007/08/02/politico/ Life of a Student at Tufts University Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:02:36 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Richard Mondello : Two TED Talks You Must See http://www.richardmondello.com/2007/08/02/politico/#comment-722 Richard Mondello : Two TED Talks You Must See Sun, 13 Apr 2008 19:03:07 +0000 http://exposay.net/2007/08/02/politico/#comment-722 [...] Gore as an intellectual. I’ve watched An Inconvenient Truth and read The Assault on Reason (here’s my review) and think Gore is a decent man who wants to change the world in two central areas - the climate [...] [...] Gore as an intellectual. I’ve watched An Inconvenient Truth and read The Assault on Reason (here’s my review) and think Gore is a decent man who wants to change the world in two central areas - the climate [...]

]]> By: Michael http://www.richardmondello.com/2007/08/02/politico/#comment-67 Michael Sun, 05 Aug 2007 03:37:43 +0000 http://exposay.net/2007/08/02/politico/#comment-67 You write too much to complain about having too much Summer Homework You write too much to complain about having too much Summer Homework

]]> By: Ricky http://www.richardmondello.com/2007/08/02/politico/#comment-56 Ricky Thu, 02 Aug 2007 22:41:43 +0000 http://exposay.net/2007/08/02/politico/#comment-56 I just can't fathom the American public and their concern with personal life. For example, Barack Obama is a smoker. I vehemently hate smoking, however, this fact doesn't phase me in the slightest. The Internet does have a great potential for misinformation. However, its potential to democratize information overrides this disadvantage in my mind. Anyone can put something out there, including people in repressive regimes, like China. Also, the people in said regimes can subvert harmful propaganda. Yes, any crazy can make a blog and put whatever he *or she* wants on it. Likewise, any consumer of information can choose whether or not to consume this information. It's as simple as a key stroke or a mouse click. Additionally, with features such as comments enabled, it lets the consumers point out what information is correct or incorrect, or for intelligent debates to take place. You don't see that on TV. I just can’t fathom the American public and their concern with personal life. For example, Barack Obama is a smoker. I vehemently hate smoking, however, this fact doesn’t phase me in the slightest.

The Internet does have a great potential for misinformation. However, its potential to democratize information overrides this disadvantage in my mind. Anyone can put something out there, including people in repressive regimes, like China. Also, the people in said regimes can subvert harmful propaganda.

Yes, any crazy can make a blog and put whatever he *or she* wants on it. Likewise, any consumer of information can choose whether or not to consume this information. It’s as simple as a key stroke or a mouse click. Additionally, with features such as comments enabled, it lets the consumers point out what information is correct or incorrect, or for intelligent debates to take place. You don’t see that on TV.

]]> By: Kim http://www.richardmondello.com/2007/08/02/politico/#comment-53 Kim Thu, 02 Aug 2007 22:16:42 +0000 http://exposay.net/2007/08/02/politico/#comment-53 Personal life is intensely important to the voting public. It's easier to vote for someone if you think you can trust him/her, and you can more easily trust someone to whom you can relate. The chapter on religion is probably a case for those who tend to vote with Christian values in mind (and tend to vote Republican). Most people don't decide who to vote for (or make many decisions, for that matter) on a purely intellectual basis. And as for the flow of information, I agree completely. The Internet does have a big potential to spread false information, though. Not that what you see on TV is going to always be accurate, since it's influenced by giant corporations and advertising, but you can reasonably assume that it's been at least somewhat checked. (Not that anyone actually fact-checks what they see on TV (besides Michael Moore) so maybe it is blatantly untrue.) Any crazy out there can make a blog and put whatever he wants on it. ;) Personal life is intensely important to the voting public. It’s easier to vote for someone if you think you can trust him/her, and you can more easily trust someone to whom you can relate. The chapter on religion is probably a case for those who tend to vote with Christian values in mind (and tend to vote Republican). Most people don’t decide who to vote for (or make many decisions, for that matter) on a purely intellectual basis.

And as for the flow of information, I agree completely. The Internet does have a big potential to spread false information, though. Not that what you see on TV is going to always be accurate, since it’s influenced by giant corporations and advertising, but you can reasonably assume that it’s been at least somewhat checked. (Not that anyone actually fact-checks what they see on TV (besides Michael Moore) so maybe it is blatantly untrue.) Any crazy out there can make a blog and put whatever he wants on it. ;)

]]>