What is your Opinion on this question?

Question

What clues make you skeptical and start wondering if someone is trying to sneak prejudicial rhetoric into a discussion or article?

Answer 1

You can usually see it in the following clues:

- Use of overly dramatic adjectives (example: he made a "collosal" mistake)

- Exaggeration used with the purpose of driving a point home

- Not properly backing up arguments with facts, or not citing sources

- Lack of tolerance of the "other side" of a story. A person who has carefully researched and laid out his or her argument will be very comfortable accepting the opposing opinions of others, and will be able to debate a topic in a civilized, diplomatic manner. A person who is prejudiced will be more hot-tempered, dramatic, nervous and irritated around others with a differing opinion.

- Repetition of the same point: if someone is being prejudiced and trying to make a point without having sufficient background evidence to support their argument, they will try to repeat the same points more than once, in different wording, to try to make it sound more convincing

The best thing to do, when judging the impartiality of an article, is to ask yourself: Why did this individual choose to write this? Does the piece of literature deliver an essential piece of information to the audience (such as of an impending crisis or an important world event)? Or is the purpose to incite emotion? Or simply to entertain? Try to put yourself in the author's shoes.

Answer 2

What clues make you skeptical? What makes you wonder if someone is trying to sneak prejudicial rhetoric into a discussion or article?