Is this actually about strawmen?: Strawman News Media

For starters, for a trope supposedly about the War On Straw, there's an awfully long Real Life section (which, shockingly, is NOT filled with Natter and complaining). Since strawmen are supposed to be weakened versions of the argument, if an article supposedly about them is has so much Truth in Television, it doesn't seem like it's really about strawmen at all.

But Wait There's More! The examples themselves don't really seem about strawman depictions of news media. It's my impression that this may be covering a number of tropes at once - some of which overlap with generic Strawman Politicals, and others (such as the propaganda news networks) can be split off into their own tropes. In short, I'm not really sure what to do with this page.

Incidentally, I think this applies equally to all War On Straw tropes with a real life section. If it's real, then it's not really a strawman.

edited 2nd Apr '11 11:53:02 PM by nrjxll

I'd assume the procedure would be to move the real life examples which do have some merit (for example, the portrayals in Private Eye) to appropriate sections and delete the others.

As well as that, the page could do with a rewrite. The whole thing seems to be biased toward the US, except for some questionable references to British media.

edited 3rd Apr '11 6:33:10 AM by halfmillennium

Yeah, like much of the wiki, that page displays an astonishing degree of US-centrism. I mean, every media outlet is accused of having a *-wing bias? Yeah, my country's media actually tends to be very neutral and good (tabloids notwithstanding).

The Real Life section should be deleted, for one simple reason: It is by definition impossible for something in real life to be a strawman. A strawman is an argument which resembles one made by your opponent, but is actually a much weaker and less plausible form which is easy to argue against, thus making it look like you've won when you actually have not.

So, for example, if you say the mainstream media can't be trusted because of how often Fox News outright lies, you're attacking a strawman version of the media, by painting all outlets as being the same as Fox News. Fox News itself is not a strawman, it's a real entity that has many of the characteristics which people habitually assign to strawmen.

This trope is for examples of actual news media outlets that are, in-universe, strawman constructs, not about people making strawman claims about news media. If you say that News Channel X is a radical left-wing communist propaganda machine that wants to topple our government, you are making a strawman about news media, but it's not this trope. But if you publish a novel, and the bad guy is a news network that really is a radical left-wing communist propaganda machine that wants to topple our government, then it's this trope.

But that's part of the point. I'm not convinced that the examples are all strawmen either. Most of the ones describing "type 4" media (vapid news) are really no worse than Real Life. I'm wondering if maybe this shouldn't be a page on the War On Straw at all.

It could be two tropes (either soft or hard split): Controlled by some outside group (government, business, conspiracy) and apathetic or heavily biased.

And No Journalistic Integrity should be a redirect.

I agree with Vampire Buddha. At the very least, I think that the real life section should be cut. It says right on the page to be very careful when adding real life examples, and looking at the page, something tells me that they... haven't. Some of the other big War On Straw pages (Strawman Political, Straw Feminist, etc.) are on the "no real life examples" list already, and for good reason. Not only would it make this page less inflammatory, but it would remove a lot of the US-centrism.

Huh? Real Life has Strawmen. That's why the term exists. The Real Life examples show various news organizations being accused of being strawmen. Some are accusations themselves, which should be deleted. But those that describe organizations being described as one of the strawmen types are perfectly legitimate examples.

what he said^

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I don't see a single connection to the War On Straw in that page. It's just a list of common news-media stereotypes.

edited 26th Jul '11 5:29:29 AM by Shale