The Role of Propaganda in the Media.

As this is the final round of this debate I will attempt to clarify the topic of contention, the arguments presented, and a final rebuttal of Con's statements. To begin, it should be noted that my opponent has concluded that propaganda is intended to misinform its audience. Because of this, propaganda is able to create a less informed electorate, which in itself is a logical assertion of the constraints placed on the democratic process. Since this is a pre-determined and agreed upon theory, the burden of disprove rested on Con's shoulders. Logically if an electorate is less knowledgeable concerning the policies of candidates seeking election they will not have the capacity to properly determine if those specific policies will result in negative or positive effects. Thus while determining which candidate to select their decision making ability will be hindered, this is how democracy is limited. This is evident by my reference above: Romney was intentionally misleading the public by claiming that Obama had made it easier for individuals to acquire food stamps, this was of course false. Con's singular argument concerning approval polls, fails to take into account, the glaringly obvious fact, that the individuals surveyed are victims of media manipulation. This of course brings their level of determination into dispute and does not serve as a relevant, objective, or unbiased indication of the state of democracy. Yet, the premise of Con's argument seems to rest on this notion that if the democratic system had failed, the approval polls would reflect this circumstance, which is simply false. To expand on this, again, Glenn Greenwald remarked that individuals are aware of media manipulation; however, they avoid reflecting that they themselves could be the victims of this manipulation. Furthermore, cognitive behavioral studies have shown that thinking dispositions such as need for cognition and actively open-minded thinking have been associated with belief bias and the magnitude of framing effects. Individuals higher in need for cognition and actively open-minded thinking displayed less belief bias and less susceptibility to framing effects, thus providing evidence contrary to Con's opinion that, "propaganda misinforms only people who want to be misinformed and are looking for an excuse to be misinformed." It should also be noted that Con's arguments are guilty of post hoc illogical reasoning; that is they indicate correlation not causation; the mere fact that one precedes the other does not indicate any cause between the variables. To continue along the lines of false assertions, under the banner of "Pro's arguments" Con has for the second time misrepresented my statements. The context in which I referred to income and education was clearly labeled not to be used as an argument. Con posed several questions, which I will address: 1. The logical fallacy of, "...what is wrong with manipulating the public, if the public wants to be manipulated?" It is presumptuous to claim that "the public wants to be manipulated" since there is no accurate method to determine if this is true. Con is attempting to argue that media manipulation can only occur as a result of public consent, which is an absolutely absurd statement with no logical premise to support it. 2. "Again, why is this an issue? Why is it the media's job to inform the public? They are doing what the people want, which is why people choose to watch and pay for dishonest media." The news media's role is to inform the public just as a doctor’s role is to aid the sick and unhealthy; this seems a fatuous question as the topic of the debate is the role of propaganda in the media and its effect on the democratic process. Con's lack of knowledge on this topic is quite obvious, even more so is the lack of research done to establish a relevant argument, which leads one to then question his/her motive for accepting this debate. 3. "This is true but irrelevant. Although people have the ability to be informed (factcheck sites, etc) many choose not to, which is not a problem in a democracy. Only elected officials need to factually know about all the issues." This, again, is an illogical argument: all theories on decision making processes involve the acquisition of knowledge or information, generally referred to as the communication phase but Con does not mention any related evidence. Con has yet to make a single relevant argument; my opponent has relied on his personal opinion to assert his belief that propaganda in the media does not affect democracy simply because approval polls do not deviate dramatically year to year. Not only is this unrelated to the topic of debate but it is an oversimplified response to an issue Con has displayed little understanding of. (1): West, R. F., Meserve, R. J., & Stanovich, K. E. (2012). Cognitive Sophistication Does Not Attenuate the Bias Blind Spot. Journal Of Personality & Social Psychology, 103(3), 506-519.