Comments on: A Public Service Announcement http://firewallender.com/a-public-service-announcement-2/ aka @firewallender Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:46:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Cassie Wallender http://firewallender.com/a-public-service-announcement-2/comment-page-1/#comment-6425 Cassie Wallender Fri, 09 Oct 2009 22:48:20 +0000 http://firewallender.com/?p=391#comment-6425 "Now it's just about doing what it takes to make sure your side wins before the other can." Interesting remark, only one side is in rush-rush-rush mode to push something through in a hurry. I read something in this article (<a href="http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/08/health-care-speechwriter-for-edwards-obama-and-clinton-doesnt/#)" target="_blank">http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/08/health-ca...</a> this morning that really rang true to me: "We need to get this right, not right away. A rushed bill will have consequences." I appreciate that you want to look at both sides of the argument - and I'm willing to listen, truly. But I don't think there's anything wrong with having your own opinion and disagreeing with the other guy. There is no shame in a retort to a strategic shot across the bow. The first "PSA" was an attempt to use humor to sway public opinion, and I don't think there's anything wrong in showing them that street runs both ways. Actually, if politics used a little more humor I think we'd all be the better for it. Both were well produced, funny, and presented a perspective. Sarcasm has the danger of setting up "strawmen" arguements for debates - but I think both videos actually acknowledged this quite publicly and in good humor (with Will Ferrell's comments about mini-zoos and the our comment that "Joe Biden is actually a unicorn"). Maybe no minds are *changed* by these videos, but since they are based in humor I think more people will be open to watching a video they know doesn't align with their current opinion, just because it might be funny. And in so doing, maybe they'll be exposed to a few ideas or perspectives they hadn't considered, and it will get them to think about it a bit and dig deeper. I do agree that *all* videos have a general lack of references to back up what they are saying (at least ours attempts!). It would be nice to see a trend of "references" posted with every video - like the end of a wikipedia article. But I'm afraid that's merely a dream that will never be. You know what they say... wish in one hand, Nobel Prize in the other.... ;-) "Now it's just about doing what it takes to make sure your side wins before the other can." Interesting remark, only one side is in rush-rush-rush mode to push something through in a hurry. I read something in this article (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/10/08/health-ca… this morning that really rang true to me: "We need to get this right, not right away. A rushed bill will have consequences."

I appreciate that you want to look at both sides of the argument – and I'm willing to listen, truly. But I don't think there's anything wrong with having your own opinion and disagreeing with the other guy. There is no shame in a retort to a strategic shot across the bow. The first "PSA" was an attempt to use humor to sway public opinion, and I don't think there's anything wrong in showing them that street runs both ways. Actually, if politics used a little more humor I think we'd all be the better for it. Both were well produced, funny, and presented a perspective. Sarcasm has the danger of setting up "strawmen" arguements for debates – but I think both videos actually acknowledged this quite publicly and in good humor (with Will Ferrell's comments about mini-zoos and the our comment that "Joe Biden is actually a unicorn").

Maybe no minds are *changed* by these videos, but since they are based in humor I think more people will be open to watching a video they know doesn't align with their current opinion, just because it might be funny. And in so doing, maybe they'll be exposed to a few ideas or perspectives they hadn't considered, and it will get them to think about it a bit and dig deeper.

I do agree that *all* videos have a general lack of references to back up what they are saying (at least ours attempts!). It would be nice to see a trend of "references" posted with every video – like the end of a wikipedia article. But I'm afraid that's merely a dream that will never be. You know what they say… wish in one hand, Nobel Prize in the other…. ;-)

]]> By: Ryan Christensen http://firewallender.com/a-public-service-announcement-2/comment-page-1/#comment-6255 Ryan Christensen Thu, 01 Oct 2009 01:31:40 +0000 http://firewallender.com/?p=391#comment-6255 While entertaining, I've never found these types of sarcastic back-and-forths (not just the reply video... the original, too) to be all that useful. They have the potential to do more harm than good. For either video to misrepresent the other position and suggest the action they do without providing *anything* to back up the sarcastic assertions hurled (or without encouraging viewers to investigate for themselves) seems incredibly irresponsible. I can only hope that no minds are actually changed directly by either of these videos... that nobody actually calls those numbers as a result of watching. Instead, I would hope people care enough about having an informed opinion to do some *real* research before committing themselves. That aside, all I keep seeing in this debate is people talking past each other. People have become so entrenched in their positions that it's now about who can shout the loudest, make the funniest video, or be the most charismatic... not who actually has the most logical argument. Not who has things like "reason" and "facts" on their side. Nobody wants to listen to the opposition argument, and nobody has the balls to admit being wrong now and again. Nor do they tend to be willing to call out anyone on "their side" for acting ridiculous. (I'm obviously generalizing here... our own Mrs. Wallender is a great example of someone willing to call people out. We need more Cassies in the world.) It's not about knowing you have truth on your side or arming people with information anymore. Now it's just about doing what it takes to make sure your side wins before the other can. While entertaining, I've never found these types of sarcastic back-and-forths (not just the reply video… the original, too) to be all that useful. They have the potential to do more harm than good. For either video to misrepresent the other position and suggest the action they do without providing *anything* to back up the sarcastic assertions hurled (or without encouraging viewers to investigate for themselves) seems incredibly irresponsible.

I can only hope that no minds are actually changed directly by either of these videos… that nobody actually calls those numbers as a result of watching. Instead, I would hope people care enough about having an informed opinion to do some *real* research before committing themselves.

That aside, all I keep seeing in this debate is people talking past each other. People have become so entrenched in their positions that it's now about who can shout the loudest, make the funniest video, or be the most charismatic… not who actually has the most logical argument. Not who has things like "reason" and "facts" on their side. Nobody wants to listen to the opposition argument, and nobody has the balls to admit being wrong now and again. Nor do they tend to be willing to call out anyone on "their side" for acting ridiculous. (I'm obviously generalizing here… our own Mrs. Wallender is a great example of someone willing to call people out. We need more Cassies in the world.)

It's not about knowing you have truth on your side or arming people with information anymore. Now it's just about doing what it takes to make sure your side wins before the other can.

]]>