Analysis Of Intentional Talk

Regardless of the news station, television show, magazine, or person, anything that is expressed through human values will have bias. Principles such as politics, sports, and even certain parking spots can have bias opinions. Opinions, whether one likes them or not, are always worthwhile; however, once those opinions take away freedoms of others, they become irrelevant. Whether the opinion is coming from CNN, Sports Illustrated, or Duck Dynasty, that single opinion could sway someone from one side to another. Regardless the source of the opinion, it is every democratic citizen’s right to state his or her belief; however, there is a fine line between opinions and taking away freedom. Although many people agree that every democratic citizen …show more content…
Intentional Talk is a talk show on television about Major League Baseball. This talk show has two featured anchors with multiple associate reporters. The anchors and reporters predict how Major League Baseball players and teams will perform in the future as well as how they are performing in current situations. Intentional Talk hosts give their opinions on Major League Baseball situations; however, they also give their opinions on lives of current and past players. Even though the hosts do not solely report on baseball, the opinions they hold are valued and worthwhile to the public. These opinions can show the public what some players are truly like. For example, Todd Frazier, ex-third baseman of the Cincinnati Reds became known for giving back to the city of Cincinnati in huge ways. Intentional Talk was the first and one of the few talk shows that reported how this man donates not only his money, but also his time to the city of Cincinnati. Cincinnati recently traded this great young man to the Chicago White Sox, and the first thing that Intentional Talk reported about was that Frazier started volunteering the day he moved to Chicago. These types of broadcasts may only appeal to certain groups; however, their opinions are worthwhile to everyone because they not only show facts, but also show the lives of …show more content…
These sources are being democratic by using the freedom of speech, press, and even assembly. They are also using democratic morals by informing the public on certain topics such as politics and sports. These opinionated sources, whether they are right or wrong, use democratic values to the extreme, showing arguments from one side or the other. Due to these sources being opinionated, people who would normally be closed minded are able to hear, and possibly agree with, other arguments that do not necessarily correspond with their original beliefs. However, democratic values end when certain groups try to take away the freedoms of others. Many would argue that the rioters at Trump’s rallies hold fascist ideals due to the people wishing to take away Trump’s freedom of speech and assembly. Democracy was based on the theory of citizens being informed with multiple arguments so that they could decide what is best for not only them, but also all. Most opinionated sources in the United States hold democratic values, but there are a few people and stations who wish to take those democratic privileges