Hybrid Ambassador
Registered
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2012
- Messages
- 1,851
- Likes
- 568
ElQueso, sorry that interpreted your meaning of "sound bytes"wrongly..However, do like your not too long or way too long writing!A "sound byte" does not contain sufficient information to support a position, it merely gives the position and leaves a vacuum as to why anyone would support such a position. And therefore equating intellectual discourse with hearing a bit of music to determine if you want to buy an album is also a false analogy - in my opinion and according to my position on the matter
"Sound bytes" in my comment refers to politicians, at least in the US, who make a short comment on the TV that fits within a few seconds of airtime that summarizes their position. The problem with sound bytes in this sense is that there is no discussion, no argument, just a bunch of short comments that people begin to take as fact or, conversely, shrug off as nonsense. They are used because supposedly people are not capable of the attention span required to understand the points behind a position. Also, if you repeat something often enough, people will begin to believe it and by extension, the less extraneous the information presented, the more likely people will believe it whether it has basis in reality or not (Goebbels was an artist at this - take a look at the Nazi propaganda machine).
Without complete discussion of the facts as people see them, it is easy to start slipping in meme-generating concepts that become accepted all to easily and no one ever has the opportunity to discuss and think critically related to a specific topic.
I certainly write too much at times, but I would rather err on the side of too much information than too little. It is a waste of my time to throw out a couple of comments that are not backed up by examples or discussion of specific points, when talking about something I consider serious. Without information to backup a statement, others to whom I am communicating don't have any reason to reconsider their own positions, as I do on a continual basis when presented with information that I can use to evaluate my own positions.
In this particular case, I could have said simply "equating expats blowing off steam on an expat forum is not the same as equating rude behavior in a host's house, as a guest". The problem with just stating this brief position is that there is more tied up in the concept I am advancing than just the wrongly-suited analogy. It would have been a waste of time to stop with the quote just given because it would have done nothing to change anyone's mind, or at least offer an alternative to the other position posited.
Of course, if people will not read what I write, that is also a problem, but at least I have done my part. I have more chance of convincing someone else of a different position to their own if they read, and those who read are more likely to consider my position than those who don't. I try not to write to the lowest common denominator.
Keep your excellent writing style for long. You're my inspiration (also steveinbsas)for my apprenticing the difficult English language, wanting to becoming as good as a native speaker soon! Ha,ha,haaa.
