because not all Y residents are highly-educated. The rural areas' residents did not receive good education, these people are often unable to distinguish right from the wrong, easily influenced by their emotions and religions, or be used by people with such motives.
I think that's rubbish. How can I argue with him? (I want an argument that will stand logically)
2006-11-21 14:22:56 · 2 answers · asked by English Learner 2 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
Interpretation is not a restriction of free press. It may be limitation of understanding on the part of those you spoke of, but in no way does that limit the media from writing what they want.
2006-11-21 14:37:33 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Press freedom is not about making right academic argument. It's about being able to access information that is free of manipulation by policy makers who intends to sway public's will in their interest. If not all are educated then some may be highly educated or smart. So smart people seeing things differently is not ruled out. Even if they're uneducated the statement never mentions how they would see things. That's weird statement right there.
2006-11-22 07:25:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋