This just in: a tyrannical super-terrorist is slaughtering innocents in your neighborhood; are you and your loved ones next? Find out how many of these perverted, right-wing, villainous doomsday-harbingers live on your street tonight, but first, a word from our sponsors. Is the news feeling too accurate lately? Not enough controversy stirring up in the media? Don’t miss the nation’s latest craze, try sensationalism! With sensationalism in journalism, news media, and politics, American citizens can dispose of free thinking and rely on more exciting language that is oversimplified, over-exaggerated, and charged for unethical manipulation, ultimately downgrading the importance of critical thinking, and contradicting the American ideals that form
…show more content…
Lera Boroditsky, who has won a number of awards for her objective examination of the structures of languages and their connections to thought, compiles further analysis with actual evidence to suggest that different languages have a noticeable impact on the way one thinks in her essay entitled “Lost in Translation.” For example, the understanding of causality is fundamentally different in languages that tend to “describe events in terms of agents doing things,” with English speakers more likely to remember the individual who accidentally tipped over a vase, and Spanish and Japanese speakers more likely to say “the vase broke itself” (131-132). Not only do these results explain the American media’s often incessant desire to hold somebody accountable for every accident, but they illustrate how one’s mind may become more or less adept at a particular skill, such as critical thinking, depending on how they send and receive communication throughout their life. Evidence suggests that the structures that inhabit language appear to have an unconsciously direct influence on thought, so it is safe to assume that when sensational language is flooding the media, it can be inhibiting critical thought in its consumers, and manipulating perspectives to support corrupt
Lera Boroditsky, who has won a number of awards for her objective examination of the structures of languages and their connections to thought, compiles further analysis with actual evidence to suggest that different languages have a noticeable impact on the way one thinks in her essay entitled “Lost in Translation.” For example, the understanding of causality is fundamentally different in languages that tend to “describe events in terms of agents doing things,” with English speakers more likely to remember the individual who accidentally tipped over a vase, and Spanish and Japanese speakers more likely to say “the vase broke itself” (131-132). Not only do these results explain the American media’s often incessant desire to hold somebody accountable for every accident, but they illustrate how one’s mind may become more or less adept at a particular skill, such as critical thinking, depending on how they send and receive communication throughout their life. Evidence suggests that the structures that inhabit language appear to have an unconsciously direct influence on thought, so it is safe to assume that when sensational language is flooding the media, it can be inhibiting critical thought in its consumers, and manipulating perspectives to support corrupt