This is an excerpt from one of my journal entries in a response to Rachel Maddow’s "Can You Say That A Little Louder, Candy?" on the filter bubble in connection to the election, that displays my uninformed criticism, No part of the segment was conducive to informing the viewer neutrally about the candidate’s’ stances. Instead what you get is a women venting out her aggressive
and bitter opinion. As I’m watching this I saying two things: one, if this wasn’t for a class, there is no way in the world I’d be watching this, and two, this is what we’ve come to when we let anybody have a talk show set. Honestly, I felt like was watching a visual blog and they were just ranting and raving. Oh wait a minute, I was. Again, in this example you could tell I wasn’t interested in embracing anything in this subject matter, nor was anything informative going to come out of me, I actually ended up doing the very thing I described the news anchor doing. The fact that this subject matter had no connection to my own filter bubble, my discussions in class, my writings, all stemmed from this mindset of defending against that idea of change I spoke of earlier, because to listen to other perspectives would require change. So instead I defended my bubble, while simultaneously criticizing the information by using whatever loop holes I had like the government controlling information to make my position valid, which is basically what Tannen says about students that are agonistic, because they “ignore facts that support other’s views, citing only evidence that supports our own positions” (They Say 216). In contrast, Foucault’s view in connection with criticism is that agonism is needed to expose the areas of improvement in a student, “even if that means ruffling a couple of feathers” (Puotinen 16-6-10). Nevertheless, I feel that I’ve made incremental strides to doing my best to be open to this educational process, so that I can get the most growth and development I can out of this experience. Being in my English class has played a huge part in understanding and letting different perspectives be a part of my development. After focusing on the subject matters of agonism and filter/media bubbles, I’ve chosen to be a lot more conscious about what information I take in, but more importantly how I perceive things. That’s why I titled my essay “Bursting My
Bubble”, because I’ve learned that only you have the power to change how you understand things, and only you can determined when and how you get that information. I have the power to “burst my bubble”, and in this particular excerpt, I show effort in doing so, “After listening to the Rachel Maddow segment again with the understanding I have now, I do agree with the Maddow in regards to how information can be distorted and absurd, and the media bubble can prevent people from getting a diverse perspective”. In this example, you can hear a more open attitude
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 8 pages?
- Winter '20
- Subject matter, Deborah Tannen, Agonism