4: Opinions

The power of opinions is really exemplified today, especially with all of the current events. I think that people like to read opinionated things regardless of consenting/differing opinions because they legitimize our opinions. If we read something that agrees with what we think, our opinion is reaffirmed; if we come across something that goes against our opinion, we become so heated that we shut down and just think that we’re automatically correct and whoever wrote it must not have their facts correct.

In the NYT “Why Facts Don’t Unify Us,” there is a quote that reads. “In the case of information about ourselves…people normally alter their beliefs more in response to good news. In certain circumstances, that will also be true for political issues.. But at times, good political news can threaten our deepest commitments, and we will give it less weight.”  This reminded me of one of my favorite cracked articles of all time, titled “6 Harsh Truths That Will Make You a Better Person.” Point number 6 (actually point #1, aka the most important point made) says, “Everything inside you will fight improvement,” that we “intentionally interpret…criticism as an insult” and we “focus on the messenger to avoid hearing the message.” 

I know this is true because I’m guilty of it, especially when reading opposing opinions on things that I’m really passionate about. For example, when reading the TownHall Op-Ed about liberals, I was super shook, in a bad way, because the opinions of John Hawkins went against my beliefs. The extremely negative way he portrayed liberals based on liberal ideals got me thinking, NOPE, I’m out, and had me thinking about all the “wrong” things that people on the opposite end of the spectrum feel (I’m actually moderate leaning left, but it still fired me up).

But I think this is why Op-Ed articles can be great source of information. Op-Ed articles are written in a way that is really opinionated while still having a varied source of facts, sometimes even complete with links to their sources of info. Reading different Op-Eds revolving on the same thing can provide something like the two halves of whole. “Liberals Are the Sort of People Who…” and “Trump’s history of corruption is mind-boggling…” both are very opinionated articles on the same topic that take opposing views. Both Op-Eds are charged with negatively contorted words about the candidate that they don’t support, and don’t exactly say things that are wrong, just things that have been phrased to highlight what they mean to an extent that is so exaggerated that it sounds wrong, specifically to the person whose was already pre-inclined to disagree. I can provide a personal example for this. Like I stated, reading“Liberals Are the Sort of People Who…” had me shook, to the point where I was just -

I guess that the things pointed out weren’t necessarily wrong, the same way that opinions can’t actually be wrong. Still, the way he displayed his thoughts, going against my own personal beliefs, just sounded wrong. On the other hand, “Trump’s history of corruption is mind-boggling…” sit pretty well with me. I agree with what was said passionately, and I just wanna wave the points made in the article in front of people who say “at least Trump isn’t corrupt.” But like “6 Harsh Truths That Will Make You a Better Person” and “Why Facts Don’t Unify Us,” (though in a much nicer way) said/implied, we tend to respond more strongly to information when it affirms a belief and less likely to respond to information when it doesn’t.

On to JSTOR articles though - these are really fact-based. The tone remains relatively neutral and the articles objective, relaying facts without the focus of the opinion of the writer. So while Op-Eds seem (to me, at least), to highlight either their opinions through fact-based argument or fact-based argument throught opinions, JSTOR articles simply highlight the facts without opinion. I couldn’t see JSTOR articles firing anyone up the way an Op-Ed would, but JSTOR articles do relay information just as powerfully as Op-Eds, since the lack of opinions mean that we can focus more on the information and formulate our own responses based on fact. Which might be just as well, considering the lack of opinion may make us more open to accepting the facts as they are.