Is placing questions in the titles dishonest?

Post Reply New Topic

Are conservatives more likely to be stupid? That's an easy way to state that they are stupid, but with a question mark, you supposedly can get away with it, because you are just "asking" instead of stating so. Even though you are really stating so and everybody knows about it. But you 'look' balanced.

Then you fill your article with some speculation to support the premise. But it is all right, you don't really have to prove your premise. Because you officially just made a question.

Do immigrants smell like garlic? I don't know about that, but I have heard they do. Even though there is no evidence for that, I think it is worth asking that question

yes but we are a nation of headlines so the story (without reading it) is the headline. My local paper, The Oregonian, is usually responsible but this is the Portland Metro area so ocassionally it can slam something like "draconian" budget cuts or increasing our efforts to crack down on employers who hire illegals in its editorials by posing the question instead of outright saying so.

Placing questions in forum titles is dishonest if the question is a "leading
question", with "leading question" much as defined in most legal dictionaries.

Tadzio

Uh oh, someone has discovered "push polling". I don't think dishonest is quite the right word, it falls more under manipulative.

I worked on a push poll for Bob Dole. (not writing calling)
but they were pretty subtle back in the day.

the one the RNC used against McCain back when he was in the primary with Bush II was wild.

Q: Would it change your opinion of John McCain if you knew he had a black daughter.
stuff like that.

this.

however i think there is a certain grey area where a leading question can bring forth some interesting debate.
maybe it has to do with context, as soon as you involve a group of people a priori it immediately gets iffy in my book.

Yeah, the Bush vs McCain South Carolina push poll has become the new gold standard in political dirty tricks, at least the legal ones. That's one of those areas where I'm often misunderstood because I can admire the intellect required to conceive of and execute a campaign like that without necessarily endorsing the morality of it. It's like marveling at a very clever and well executed fraud scheme or a complicated bank heist.

If you word the title of the thread as a question ("Are conservatives more likely to be stupid?") you are inviting discussion.
If you word the title of the thread as a statement ("Conservatives are more likely to be stupid!") you are inviting argument.
A subtle difference, but the question mark says to people "What do you think?".

Yes minister always gets it right:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgyKpkLpccE[/youtube]

Is Dox47 a condescending prick for assuming I just discovered this? I'd say this invites us to discussion.

I mean, it is likely impossible that this thread was a rant for the recent surge in the number of titles in that style .

Anyway, let's go with manipulative.

^
My, aren't we feeling defensive today. Or is it 'My, aren't we feeling defensive today?' I can't decide which is more condescending.

Basically true.
How do you do a poll without asking a question?

But then there are questions, and then there are questions.

"Does Vexcaliber still beat his wife?"
"Are any of you readers here so damned dumb as to think that anyone but Sarah Palin will be our next president?"