Assignment 1 Primary Post: (Due Wed or before)
For this DQ you have two options. Choose only one of them for your primary post.
1:
Choose one of the following pseudoscience/practices.
• You should search around and try to find somebody applying or arguing for this practice.
o Give a link to your source. If it is a video then quote enough of the material so that we can evaluate your analysis.
• Then find three flaws or ways in which it fails to meet the scientific method. You may also refer to some of the fallacies discussed earlier in the course. Each should be explained in a separate paragraph.
• Next, give some additional analysis of your own.
2:
According to a paper by Boudry, Blancke, and Pigliucci, appeal to intuition, our desires, and often “cultural stabilization” are hallmarks of pseudoscience. Sciences tend to run counter to intuition given that the world is “indifferent” to our intuitions and repeatedly challenge cultural views. https://philpapers.org/rec/BOUWMW (Links to an external site.) This is a great paper to read, but is a more challenging reading than I would require for the class. I encourage those who are interested to download and read it.
For this option, read the paper linked to directly above and write three things you found interesting, agree with, or object to in the piece. Make sure to be detailed and specific and give partial quotes so I know what area of the paper you are talking about.
Pick a student to respond to. Pick somebody who chose a different option or different pseudoscience and then respond to that analysis.
• Your response might be something you disagree with within the analysis, but it can also simply be adding to this analysis. For example, finding additional problems with the pseudoscience i
Assignment 2 M15: Discussion (DQ 13)
Module 3: DQ
Primary Post:
Due Thursday. (An extra day is given for the primary post this week.) You may wish to start thinking about this early.
Do all parts.
This assignment is a bit more time-consuming than most DQs because you will have to spend some time viewing or reading media.
Pick a single news story and see how that story is covered in three different news sources. Try to pick a story that has economic implications. Try to pick articles of the same relative length or videos of the same relative duration.
Then do all of the following:
Create a heading called “bias incentives.”
• Then, with bullet points like this one, list incentives for bias regarding this story relative to major news corporations that own the news media.
o Pay special attention to economic incentives.
o Find out who owns each of the news outlets you are going to use and label each one separately. What is the parent company? Does that company have parent interests? What does it own? Is it multinational? If the outlet receives funding but is non-profit look at where that funding tends to come from.
Next: State what the story.
Then, under three different headings named after the sources (for example ‘New York Times’) do the following:
• List the top 5 facts in order of how important the story makes them seem. (Number them from the most important to least.)
• Include a link to the source (if possible). If it is a radio broadcast, you might be able to find a transcriipt. If it is a video source you might be able to find a clip online.
Finally: Under three different headings (named after the sources) discuss the spin or bias of how the material was presented and the quality and depth of the reporting. You can use bullet points. (Label example: “New York Times Spin”). Also, if the report uses sources like think tanks, look into who is funding them.
Notes regarding sources:
• Do not pick talk shows or pundits. Pick a source that is ostensibly primarily interested in reporting, not commentating.
• Pick at least one mainstream/corporate news outlet. You may pick two.
• Pick at least one outlet that falls outside of normal corporate news. For example:
o BBC
o The Young Turks
o Other quality international news sources.
o NPR
o PBS
Response Post:
Due Sat midnight.
Do both parts.
Part one: Do any one of the following for part 1:
• If there was information you found questionable, do some fact-checking. Give details and your sources and discuss what you find.
• Add a fourth news source to your analysis (e.g. do all the steps for your primary post again, but just for that one additional news source.)
Part two: Reflect on any insight that you gained from this exercise.