TED Conversations

Warren Gee

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Would having a "Fact Check Accurate" seal on a political ad help you in deciding what to vote for?

As part of my English thesis, this is question 2 relating to the ability to sort out if political ads are truthful in their disclosure to the public.

+2
Share:

Closing Statement from Warren Gee

With the limited number of responses, an analysis of the questions are as follows:
· The voters were generally not trusting the idea that a seal of approval would help them believe that a political ad was truthful.
· The voters were more inclined to support a measure that would require that political ads must be fact checked prior to being used publicly
· The voters were evenly divided that if they were an elected official, that they would support the practice of submitting a political ad prior to putting the ad out to the public.
· Of the elected officials that responded, one was trusting the idea that a seal of approval would help them believe that a political ad was truthful, whereas one would be trusting as long as the fact checking organization was reputable.
· Of the elected officials that responded, one was inclined to support a measure that would require that political ads to be fact checked prior to being used publicly where one would be willing to examine the language of such measure.
· Of the elected officials that responded, both would support the practice of submitting a political ad prior to putting the ad out to the public noting that one would do so if the fact checking organization was reputable.
Answers submitted by eight of the nine non-elected respondents and one elected respondent, were done so with a “Yes” or “No” answer. One elected respondent and one non-elected respondent did not answer either “Yes” or “No” but with comments regarding qualifiers to the original questions. In actuality, I had a hidden agenda to the questions that I posed to both the elected and non-elected respondents. In leaving out the qualifiers, I suspected that the elected officials may not respond or would answer in a way that would avoid a total commitment of a simple “Yes” or “No” answer, and likewise I suspected that the common voter would simply see the question for what it was and just put “Yes” or “No”. I was not disappointed with the answers.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Apr 20 2013: Nice try, but as Goebbels pointed out , the most successful Propaganda is that which uses (selected) "Facts".
    • thumb
      Apr 22 2013: Yes, but let's not forget that he also several other interesting things as well: "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. ", “The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it.”, “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.” and “That propaganda is good which leads to success, and that is bad which fails to achieve the desired result. It is not propaganda’s task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success.”

      This is what my focus is on, that political advertising can be so deceptive that after a while the targeted viewers will begin to believe the false statements as being truthful. But for my class assignment, I think what I am trying to ask that if there were an honest fact checking method that would only verify that statements made were in fact truthful or not, would you then be inclined to find the ad truthful if the ad displayed a 'seal of approval' ? Thank you for your reply.
    • thumb
      Apr 30 2013: If at least the facts were required to be facts that would be a start, in more involved fact checker schemes the interpretation of the facts relevance or at least its source

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.