Wieder, Tobin. Screenshot of http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/08/frat-racist-sae-oklahoma_n_6828212.htm 8/30/2015 via Huffington Post.
I would say that this comment represents one with more credibility. Her first question's sarcasm questioning these men's role as the "best and brightest" indicates that she is concerned with the fact that young men with such presence in the community of a school can have such hidden racist beliefs. Fannie is clearly against the concept and those who hold beliefs of racism as shown by her criticism of the "mentality of those who spew racism." I believe this comment is reasonable because their is never a remark made that attacks these men other than what was mentioned in the article. These men exhibited racist behavior, as described in the article, so she calmly addresses the immorality in their beliefs.
Wieder, Tobin. Screenshot of http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/08/frat-racist-sae-oklahoma_n_6828212.htm 8/30/2015 via Huffington Post.
I find this comment to be one of the most rational of those in response to this article. Randy expresses an ominous fear that racism has been rooted in the fraternity system of SAE and potentially other chapters for decades now and is only being uncovered now through a secret recording, as shown by his claim that these racist chants have "surely gone on a long time." I believe Randy is just like almost every other commenter on this article in that he disapproves and fears the racism that is present in our society. I believe this comment is very rational because not once is there an attack or generalization made regarding the racism in this chapter of SAE. He uses the content of the article to propose the presence of racism in the foundation of this fraternity, which is a fair claim considering the obviously racist actions of the men in SAE.
Wieder, Tobin. Screenshot of http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/08/frat-racist-sae-oklahoma_n_6828212.htm 8/30/2015 via Huffington Post.
This comment immediately strike me as one lacking credibility. Jerry exhibits a calm complaint regarding conservatives and their presence in Oklahoma, indicating that he is not surprised, yet still concerned, with the actions of these boys and their supposed representation of conservatives as a whole. Jerry is obviously a liberal, or at least someone against conservatives, as shown by his quick connection of racism to the conservative platform. This commenter lacks credibility because they are generalizing all conservatives as racists even though these chants only came from a small percentage of men who may or may not be conservative at all.
Wieder, Tobin. Screenshot of http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/08/frat-racist-sae-oklahoma_n_6828212.htm 8/30/2015 via Huffington Post.
This comment is another one that obviously lacks credibility. The author of this comment predicts a fallacious situation that, in response to this controversy, conservatives will make this into an "apples and oranges debate on how white people are oppressed because they aren't allowed to say the N-word." Michael is clearly a liberal, or anti-conservative, who is quick to connect the racism of a few men to the entire conservative body in the US. He immediately criticizes conservatives by his claim that they will turn the issue into an "apples and oranges debate", indicating that he believes that conservatives make invalid claims frequently. This commenter certainly lacks credibility because he is making a generalization against conservatives even though the article never mentions conservatives at all.
Reflection: I read Dylan and Kyle's blog posts for this reflection and they reminded me that there are people on the internet who can both revive and tarnish my hope in humanity based on their reactions to controversy. Both of them included comments that obviously lacked credibility where the commenter ranted on a completely unrelated topic for a sentence or two, however both posts also included commenters with strong opinions who composed very rational posts. Dylan included a commenter who expressed his disgust in the topic of the article but then recognized that everyone has a right to their opinion. Kyle had a comment that used a phrase like "complete bull" but in a manner that supported his point in a very rational manner. These commenters showed me that there really are people on the internet who can oppose someone's actions strongly and provide a just argument without cursing their existence.
After reading your post, I appreciated what you had to say about these comments. I definitely agree with you when you say those comments were not credible because of how slanted their point of views were and how they did not add any genuine information into the discussion. I like how the comments you chose really were clearly credible or not credible as it helped give more fact to what you had to say and I will use this new information the next I have to choose what is or isn't credible.
ReplyDeleteHey Tobin,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with how you evaluated these comments. Not only do I think you picked a controversy that would yield a wide array of comments (smart choice), but I think that you selected a good sample of the comments. You pointed this out for your "credible" comments, but I think they both exhibited a level of professionalism/civility that lent them credibility, which you recognized and elaborated on, despite the comments themselves being somewhat different.
Additionally, your analyses on the "not credible" comments were good, as they focused on the underlying issue that both were politically motivated in attacks against conservatives, and not related to the article.
Good job on these, and thanks for posting this.
-Mika