The OTM post that I decided to reflect on was the Smoke and Handcuffs episode. As I read my post, I could tell it was one sided, and filled with bias. I read an article of the 10 Cognitive Biases That Affect Our Everyday Decisions, and it was very helpful in pinpointing the exact biases that influenced my rhetoric in this post.
The first one I could find is called the Dunning-Kruger Effect. It basically states that non experts can overestimate their knowledge of something. I am 23 and just starting to pay attention to politics and the media. I really just regurgitated what Bob Garfield said on the show, and didn't try to site any other articles relating to the same topics he brushed on. I agreed with what he was saying about Fox being distorted and not really being critical or fair as a news channel, so I didn't feel like I needed to do any more research. That state of mind brings me to the next bias which I found called The Conformation Bias.
The Conformation Bias states that a person will seek articles or people that support their already established beliefs, instead of being open to opposing information. Bob's views and my views seemed to align on the topics discussed, so I was confident in making some drastic claims and focusing on strengthening my point, without making any effort of finding counter points. I was focusing, for example, on how many times the media has exploited the stories of minorities being linked to violence. Looking back, I should have also argued that the media also exploits Caucasian crime rates as well, or the stories where race had no importance at all. This talk show was also the first time I really heard about ICE, other than the discussion we had in class. The Dunning-Kruger Effect bias is clearly shown in my post when it came to ICE. After listening to a quick couple minutes of one person's report on ICE, I concluded that ICE is a huge waste of money. I haven't tried to look up any additional information to support or oppose that argument. I see my side very clearly, but it would still benefit me to see where the side that supports this sort of action is coming from.
There are many sides to any topic, and I can tell now that forming an opinion based off of one source may seem alright at times, but getting into the topic deeper by studying other sources will always be beneficial. As a student, I've always been told to bring many sources into a paper, but when it comes to everyday topics, I lack that same sort of mindset. Between the Dunning-Kruger Effect, and The Conformation Bias, my post was certainly one sided. Having said that, I would have liked to cite a couple other sources as counter arguments, or supportive arguments, to make the post more well rounded, and gain a broader understanding of the opposing side. While it may be hard for me to ever think of Fox News as a legit news source, it is important to see where they are coming from. While it may be hard for me to see the justification of spending money to have non documented US citizens deported in bulk, I still need to learn why people have been so passionate about doing that exact thing. We think, and therefore, we are, but to really study all sides of any given topic will make us better.
