ABC News Writer Assumes the Sale to Condition You to Welcome EU-Style Social Media Controls – Media Analysis
Kelvin Chan, a business writer for ABC News, recently penned an article called “Europe bolsters pioneering tech rules with help from Haugen.”
In the headline itself, Chan is using a tactic that I personally refer to “Assuming the Sale,” one which I have documented in past media analysis reports. The writer uses the adjective “pioneering,” which is a value-assuming term based on a presuppositional shared ‘hierarchy of value” as the well-known clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson phrases it. I myself simply prefer to it as the value that emerges from preference, or preference, to short-cut the term.
Value emerges from preference, and preference is not universal, as preference is, more often than not, tied to aggregates of like humans to be accomplished, such as preference to pursue an understanding of Christ. In aggregate, humans that share this preference will be far better equipped to grow in understanding, and thus get better at achieving this shared preference.
Preference is not universal, so value is not universal, but this writer is assuming that the values inherint in the EU’s framing of law that restricts digital social platform activity within their borders are naturally the same as the reader’s. If it’s not, at heuristic levels of understanding, your mind-body is adopting to an assumption of a reality of power that is based on this writer’s value they hope you will have has become your value through the process of assuming the sale.
Never ask a yes or no question, only ask questions that assume the sale. Never make statements that do not assume the sale is a forgone conclusion.
This news blurb is newsworthy in and of itself, I believe, but also offers a very succinct demonstration of the “assume the sale” tactic of the agit prop agent of the DNC, which this writer in fact or de facto actually represents. There is a lot more agit prop in here as well, mostly focused on other value-assuming words like “misinformation” and “harm” to give justice to the EU way of regulating human action in this digital media within their borders.
As you read the rest of the news blurb, and should you hopefully chooose to read the whole article. you will see just how foundational to the whole flow of adjectives this writer uses to describe every aspect of the EU’s “pioneering” spirit behind their tech rules, with “pioneering” implying, assuming that the EU way is the right way for all, objectively, and we don’t even have to make the argument (it’s so obvious), so we will just use language that assumes it to be true, thus making it true perceptively to the uncritical mind.
European lawmakers have pioneered efforts to rein in big technology companies and are working to strengthen those rules, putting them ahead of the United States and other parts of world that have been slower to regulate Facebook and other social media giants facing increasing blowback over misinformation and other harmful content that can proliferate on their platforms…..
….Jan Penfrat, senior policy adviser at digital rights group EDRi.
The question, Penfrat said, should also be: “Why is the U.S. so much lagging behind? And that may be because of the immense pressure from the homegrown companies” arguing to officials in Washington that stricter rules would hobble them as they compete with, for example, Chinese rivals.
Drawing up a new package of digital rules for the 27-nation European Union is getting a boost from Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen, who answered questions Monday in Brussels from a European Parliament committee. It’s the latest sign of interest in her revelations that Facebook prioritized profits over safety after the former data scientist testified last month to the U.S. Senate and released internal documents.
If the EU rules are done right, “you can create a game-changer for the world, you can force platforms to price in societal risk to their business operations so the decisions about what products to build and how to build them is not purely based on profit maximization,” Haugen told lawmakers. “And you can show the world how transparency, oversight and enforcement should work.”