Originally Posted by turtleback
Yup, lots of leaps of (il)logic in this thread.
Please quote one of my arguments and describe a logical fallacy. An argument I've made where the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises, or the premises fail to support the conclusion? If you disagree with a premise, that's doesn't make an argument illogical.
Originally Posted by iacas
Just asking: who, if anyone, has said controversial commentary doesn't have value?
No one has specifically said that, but I think that 90% of the people on this forum, including you, Fourputt, and TB, all agree that Chamblee's piece should not have been written and has little or no value (except to prove that Chamblee is a douche).
Premise: controversial commentary adds value to the state of discourse on a particular topic.
Premise: Chamblee's piece was commentary and it was controversial.
Premise: commentary that adds value to the state of discourse on a particular topic should be written.
Conclusion: Chamblee's piece adds value to the state of discourse on this topic and should be written.
I believe in freedom of the press. I believe that suppression of the written word should be a last resort taken only when the potential damage of the writing is serious enough to justify it. I'm also smart enough to figure out for myself what will influence my thoughts and opinions and what is nonsense that should be ignored.
Originally Posted by iacas
Kevin, what's the cost (or value) of your reputation? How much do you love your mother? How much do you dislike the taste of your least favorite food? Please quantify your opinion on George W. Bush and Obama - not just your vote total, but your opinion of them in summation, as parents, husbands, politicians, and everything else. I want an actual number, please. Quantify it.
Since you brought it up, I'll give an example from politics.
During the 2004 Presidential campaign, a document "surfaced" which seemed to prove that President Bush fabricated (or someone fabricated on his behalf) his service records in the Texas Air National Guard. Dan Rather ran the story on 60 minutes and, as a result, he resigned and the news team was fired.
This was news, not sports, and was reported as factual, not opinion. It also (potentially) impacted a Presidential election, so far more important than a few hundred words in a sports column--and far more important to get it right.
Regardless of whether the specific document Rather cited was authentic or forged, the story was a good story and we are all better because Rather (and CBS) had the stones to go with it. Whether a potential President of the US honorably completed his military service, or whether embarked on that service to avoid Vietnam, or shirked it altogether, or both, was a very important question. That question was more-or-less answered over the next several weeks: the journalistic consensus was that Bush completed his TANG service. That discussion wouldn't have happened if 60 minutes had not run the story.
Whether the "false" story impacted your opinion of Bush (and thus your vote) largely depended on whether you believed it.
I love golf, and happen to think that Tiger is the greatest to have played the game--I'm glad this happened. Tiger had three rules infractions in a year, and a fourth that raised eyebrows at the time (and still does for some). This discussion of whether Tiger is a cheater needed to happen. It is happening--this thread (we are a microcosm of the world) is happening because Chamblee wrote his article.
Stories should be suppressed or discouraged only if the potential impact of their falsity is so severe as to outweigh the general benefits of discourse. Twig-gate is a far, far less impactful event than the 2004 Presidential election.
I also believe that Chamblee's story negatively impacts Tiger only if you believe it. If you don't believe it, then it negatively impacts your opinion of Chamblee. Either way it has value. If it's so false, and so negatively impactful against Tiger, that it warrants either firing Chamblee or damages in a libel suit, then that is the "check" on the system. Other than that, I say write away--I can decide for myself whether to believe you.