Ned recommends his friends read "For Gulf Oil Spill Victims, A Gloomy Christmas As Unemployment Continues To Loom" at www.huffingtonpost.com, to get a sense of how information can be slanted to support the writer's preconceived ideas. Ned especially recommends his friends note how the author uses the content-free phrase "a fraction" to imply that persons described are receiving only a miniscule amount of support, when "a fraction" could be 7/8 or even 8/7. There is mention made of persons struggling to "get by" who, it was mentioned in passing, have SIX CHILDREN. Now Ned figures that anybody short of a member in good standing of the Sneering Plutocracy who is single with six kids is going to be struggling, especially in a low-wage state like Louisiana. And of course the article was full of complaints that 'victims' weren't getting 'what they deserved.' Moreover, some even said that they hadn't gotten any or enough money from the BP Slush Fund, even though the fund is not even being administered by BP. Now Ned agrees that BP shares a huge part of the blame, but has in fact been the only company that has actually taken responsibility and offered restitution.
Ned suggests his friends use their critical thinking skills to look for ways in which the author has manipulated data or taken data out of context to imply that the spill's impact is entirely at the feet of BP. And he wonders how many years it will take before every story of failure and hardship along the Gulf of Mexico is no longer laid at BP's door.
No comments:
Post a Comment