Unfortunately, we live in a society in which it sometimes seems as if everyone is shouting at everyone else. The paradigm is many of the television and radio shows that purport to pit a “conservative” against a “liberal.” What is billed as a debate on an important topic devolves into a thoroughly predictable argument, with one side talking, even shouting, at and over the other. Rather than shedding light on the issue at hand, the discussion frequently degenerates into a recitation of talking points. The cogency of one’s argument becomes meaningless because the participants focus their attention on who can come up with a better catch phrase or nasty comment.
Careful argument and analysis gives way to a blunderbuss approach. Subtleties on matters of law, policy or human behavior are lost. The particular facts of a case, and context, are ignored or overlooked if they fail to support the argument being made. Overstatement and use of excessive language abounds. If you watch — or used to watch — any of these shows, you know what I mean. Many of these exchanges bring to mind the question by comedian Fred Allen: “What’s on your mind, if you will allow the overstatement?”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
