 |
| Image courtesy of Fox News. |
A syllabus for a political science course at West Liberty University instructs students that they must filter out two potential research sources, reports WTOV, a nearby NBC affiliate.
Here is what the syllabus says:
DO NOT use
1) The Onion — this is not news this is literally a parody
2) Fox News — The tagline “Fox News” makes me cringe. Please do not subject me to this biased news station. I would almost rather you print off an article from the Onion
No other media or research sources — such as, say, just for example, MSNBC — appear to be prohibited outright. (Why would they be? They actually report the news, and are aggressive fact checkers.)
Stephanie Wolfe, the visiting assistant professor, behind the ban, has a one-year contract with the university in West Virginia’s Northern Panhandle. She is replacing another instructor who is on leave.
Upset students and some parents complained to local press outlets about what they perceived as forced political bias.
Really they're upset? I don't see why.
My question is what is biased about demanding that your students use reliable reference materials during their assignments?
You know there is a reason that Fox News is constantly being mocked on late night television and the Daily Show. Because it is nakedly a propaganda machine for conservatives, big business, and the Republican party.
Personally I think that the only people who take issue with this syllabus are Fox News viewers.
Everybody else would simply say, "Makes sense to me."
You know sometimes the only REAL difference between Fox News and The Onion, is that The Onion admits that it is doing parody.
O/T
ReplyDeleteFL Gov Rick Scott further shows why he is a Bagger Moron Gov
"Florida Driver's License Law May Violate Geneva Convention, Definitely Angers Canada"
This law was 'quietly' pushed thru and signed and came into effect Jan 1. Even the car rental agencies in Florida were not aware of this law. Finally it has blown up in the media in Canada.
As the State of FL relies heavily on tourism and the 'Snowbirds' - Gov Asshole is doing everything he can to destroy it. Overreach of another illegal law and a fee/tax grab.
Let it be known that the troopers say they will not enforce the law but until it is off the books which is not anticipated until I believe April, of course this being just in time the Snowbirds are leaving to return home, Canadians should be aware that they should be purchasing the license in that should they be involved in an accident, their insurance company will have an excuse to deny them coverage should they not have said license. Catch 22 situation.
It is stories like this that should be in the US media coverage in order to expose the Gov's overreach and further confirmation he's stunned, stupied and not qualified to be a gnat catched. His overreach not only in FL state politics, in Federal politics but also in International politics.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/15/florida-driving-law_n_2695606.html?utm_hp_ref=canada&ir=Canada
Not a big deal. I looked up a syllabus on my son's laptop for one of his classes where he had to write a paper, and it specified no Wikipedia or Opinion pieces could be used as sources for factual data. That included everything but primary sources, unless the text of the paper was discussing the OPINIONS of particular individuals as opinione, not as facts.
ReplyDeleteIt is sad that lots of kids and uneducated adults can't really tell the difference between opinion pieces and fact-based reporting, and dishonest people tend to blur those lines. But kids can learn and do whenever they are taught to question the motives of whoever is delivering the message. It's just plain old critical thinking, and it begins by recognizing one of the dozens of types of fallacies used to persuade instead of logic and a pertinent set of verifiable facts.
Opinion, commentary, editorials, and the like will ALWAYS have a bias, because that's why someone writes an opinion piece--- to persuade a reader to take or consider a certain position.
Fact-based reporting which bleeds commentary disguised as facts is an ethics issue just as serious as plagiarism or writing fiction as fact with fake sources. It when it does that, it is no longer fact-based and therefore is no longer reporting.
If I don't already know a writer's opinion or political persuasion, I can tell after reading an opinion piece. But the only way to check facts in a reporter's piece or those in an opinion piece is to check the primary sources. If they aren't provided where I can check them myself, then I ignore any information presented as factual data that they include or refer to to support their position, especially when it comes to numerical data and analysis if said data, Dishonest writers will extrapolate bad numbers out of incomplete or incorrectly analyzed data. Skewed polls is all I should need to say on that subject.
"Provide a link to the data and the source or it doesn't exist and you're full of shit." That's the standard for any professional, whether it be a journalist or an engineer. Period.
I'm paraphrasing my son's professor's syllabus for his class. Fortunately, they learned all of this writing papers as high-school sophomores. That's that "librul ndoctrination" that the RW Fundies like Rick Santorum, et al, complain about be ause they hate to have their words questioned and then to be called out whenever they totally make up shit to support their story.
I totally agree!! Citation, Citation, Citation. Bogus sources have no place in intellectual research. If you don't understand the difference then you don't belong in the realm of collegiate academics.
DeleteEveryone is entitled to an opinion. Most especially, in the USA, a democracy with a Constitution that protects the freedom of speech. Any research paper is written as a theory based on facts to back up your argument. Sources that are fundamentally known to be unreliable are indeed, not credible.
And then there is this from http://www.relfe.com/media_can_legally_lie.html
ReplyDelete"During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so. After the appeal verdict WTVT general manager Bob Linger commented, “It’s vindication for WTVT, and we’re very pleased… It’s the case we’ve been making for two years. She never had a legal claim.”
What makes me cringe is the fact that PARENTS are complaining. There's nothing like getting a call from your students' mommies.
ReplyDeleteI would say the majority of my students are conservative. It's the nature of my field (criminal justice, at a college in the south) that the professors are liberal and the majority of students are conservative. I explicitly ban sites like Wikipedia after realizing, shockingly, that students actually think those are legitimate sources.
There are very few times I would even allow newspapers or news sites as sources, only when I specifically ask for news articles. I guess it's different for political science courses.
Regardless, this takes a lot of guts on the part of this visiting professor with only a one year contract at a West Virginia school. I agree with her and it made me laugh--and professors set the rules in their courses--but I would never editorialize that much on a syllabus. List what you won't accept and move on. Then set aside time at the beginning of your course to teach your students how to recognize bias in the news (and hold up Fox News as the worst offender).
Great points. When my son is working on homework and asks me a question, I clarify that my answer is only about as reliable as wikipedia. I might have learned the answer and remember it wrong or I might remember it correctly but communicate it wrong. Too many weak links for him to depend on when it's his GPA riding on it. When it's an opinion question, I try to get him to elaborate on the facts first that lead him to a conclusion. He's more creative than i am and often brings in variables I haven't considered. I'm a linear thinker, and can break down facts and deconstruct the tangibles. But I believe thinking in a logic-based problem-solving way is a learned behavior. Weeding thru and identifying the knowns and the unknowns is the key IMO. Some people are dazzled and buffaloed by BS and shiny objects that are introduced to deflect, distract or confuse the listener. Too many details but not the right ones are signals that I'm being fed a line.
DeleteI hope this guy has tenure because the GOP is probably going to make an issue of this.
ReplyDeleteDid you even read the article? Or am I missing the snark in your comment?
Delete"Stephanie Wolfe, the visiting assistant professor, behind the ban, has a one-year contract with the university"
Piper: "Mom what is a syllabus?" Sarah: "Oh, that's just those Libruls making fun of our Family Vacation Bus."
ReplyDeleteIt's Gallup, so take it with a grain of salt, Jesse.
ReplyDeleteGallup's 'LGBT By State' Poll: Washington D.C. Has Highest Percentage Of Openly Gay Residents
On the flip side, a mere 1.7 percent of North Dakota residents polled identified as LGBT, which Montana was barely ahead with 2.6 percent.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160517/lgbt-percentage-highest-lowest-north-dakota.aspx
The Surprising Brain Differences Between Democrats and Republicans
ReplyDeletehttp://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/brain-difference-democrats-republicans
Red and yellow apples are good.
ReplyDeleteWhich would you like? You decide.
"I'll take the red!"
Ok, but don't you like green apples?
"Yes, but you didn't mention any green apples."
Exactly.
This is how I explain Fox News.
It's what they DON'T tell you.
Why are they using any "news" outlets for a college paper anyway. I have never heard of a collge allowing students to use news outlets as credible sources unless the subject could be proved through scientific literature. What kind of college is this?
ReplyDeleteI'm usually against any kind of censorship, but I do understand the teacher's point. Who wants to grade paper after paper of people too ignorant to realize that Fox isn't news? However, especially in a creative writing class, I do feel that good satire such as "The Onion" can be effective tools in teaching the value of good satire to get one's point across.
ReplyDeleteOne would think that at the College level, this caveat shouldn't be an issue in the first place.