The other side is not dumb

The article explored the idea of bias and the “Other Side” within the media. There are many positives and negatives that follow the internet, In general, the internet brings individuals together even if they disagree with each other. Since 2016, the internet and the media have expanded significantly. The ways to use the internet are very vast, some social media platforms have like, comment, or share buttons which people can use to their advantage. I agree with Blanda stating that we can be blindsided by the opinions of America, or more closely our friends and family. This statement is critical to the overall subject of the text. 

People on social media are able to showcase the highlights of their lives which makes us believe that they may have a “perfect life” when in reality, that’s just our belief that they do. The assumption that the author is making is that there are two sides on the internet, and we as humans have different beliefs, that not everyone will agree with. For example, during the 2016 election, there were two sides. If you chose one side over the other, someone may have believed that their opinion was superior to yours. This overall idea matters because it shows that people are beginning to lose sight of their own beliefs and are trying to fit in with others. This leads individuals to merging their political, work, and social lives together, instead of keeping them separated. 

The other side of this argument includes communicating that if people don’t agree with their “side”, then they must be dumb. Most people don’t realize that the individuals that are on the “other side” are actual human beings as well. In the text, “as DeBoer says, ‘You have to be willing to sacrifice your carefully curated social performance and be willing to work with people who are not like you.’” This demonstrates that people need to recognize that they can have disagreements with others or may be wrong in some situations. This can be compared to rational thought, which is defined as thinking which is consistent with known facts. Some people may post irrationally to confirm their own beliefs, instead of trying to broaden their knowledge on the same topic. 

The overall argument that Blanda is trying to convey is that people shouldn’t post every single thought that they might have onto the internet. Individuals also need to learn and recognize that someone may disagree with them, which should make the individual want to gain more knowledge on the topic. If people began to consider others along with their own beliefs, the world would benefit greatly. People would have more knowledge on certain topics, which therefore, would lead to less degrading as well as hateful speech. 

In conclusion, the point of this article was to convey that the ‘other side’ is not dumb. I resonated with the article because you can find individuals disagreeing on social media everyday, Many people decide to degrade others that don’t agree with them, whether they have factual information or not. This topic is important because the internet is constantly changing and so are people’s beliefs. 


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Create your website with
Get started
%d bloggers like this: