Everybody has a staff. Of course, I am exaggerating and what does it matter? Because one or more employees devoted to an office and a cause tend to increase the intensity with which an idea, a movement, a cause is sold, promoted, explained, defended and very often, exaggerated, too.
I read on Twitter that my state legislature was considering cutting the support of public broadcasting. What does that mean? After some Googling and sifting through the baloney, turns out that 24% of the state public broadcasting budget comes from the state, with the rest from donors and other sources. The tweet said that the proposed cut was 35% or roughly one third of 24%. Losing 8% of the funds would be no picnic, I imagine, but it seems quite different to me from the idea of the immediate loss of all public broadcasting in the state.
Compare the headlines or article titles:
Legislature considers 8% cut in public broadcasting's budget
Legislature considers cuts in public broadcasting budget funds
Because there is so much information floating around and therefore such high competition for attention, readers and audience, it seems that few people, causes or offices can afford to state the simple truth these days. It seems that almost everyone takes the view that it is better to try to be alarming. At least, cover up details that might lessen the shock and emphasize any way of allowably stating facts that frightens. But if everyone takes the salesman's approach, maybe the pitchman's approach, what happens to the idea of an educated public?
I realize there is little point in putting on the masthead of my paper or in the title of my book a statement that I speak the truth without slant or spin. I imagine that one way or another nearly all writers, speakers and promoters of causes and products assert they tell the truth. A few may be able to sketch their communication strategy and explain how it differs from what they might consider an unsophisticated approach. Many are probably able to explain what those others, the enemies of truth, are doing, how they distort the facts and lead people astray.
Maybe we have to resort to the Anglo approach used in English and England-derived legal procedures where we ask for vigorous contest between defender and prosecutor but that still leaves the need for a judge or jury to decide what seems to be the truth of the matter. As a citizen judge of many issues and questions, I wish I could get a little more unbiased, ok, minimally biased, help.
--
Bill
Main blog: Fear, Fun and Filoz
Main web site: Kirbyvariety
