My Thoughts on Comments

As American's, we are granted the right to speak publicly without punishment. The best way to physically see the first amendment in action is through comment feeds. No matter what, we are able to identify what beliefs drive the comments and whether or not they are reliable. In my previous blog, I talked about The Atlanic's article on a new "food pyramid" and explored the comments. I found a few credible comments as well as a few ones that lack credibility altogether.

1. Credible Comment #1

Screenshot taken from The Atlantic. Nestle, Marion. Goodbye, Food Pyramid. May 31, 2011 via The Atlantic. Public Domain Dedication. 

1. This commenter does not seem to have fear or anxiety about anything. He seems like he genuinely knows what he is talking about. He uses facts, examples and remains unbiased. In addition, he says he is a doctor; therefore, he must know something about how the body works and how carbohydrates affect your health. Because he remains unbiased, we can tell he isn't trying to sway us one way or another.

2. I think this commenter believes in educating ourselves as well as caring for ourselves. He is a doctor, therefore, he cares about helping others and is probably concerned about his health. He presents his views in a nonthreatening way, which makes his argument and views more believable.

3a. Raj is reasonable to me because of his ethos as well as tone. The fact that he is a doctor automatically makes me believe he knows what he is talking about because he went to school to study the body and it's mechanics. Also, he is positive throughout his entire comment, which makes me feel like he genuinely cares about others and their health.


2. Comment with no Credibility #1

Screenshot taken from The Atlantic. Nestle, Marion. Goodbye, Food Pyramid. May 31, 2011 via The Atlantic. Public Domain Dedication. 

1. This commenter seems very fervent in her views. She makes general assumptions which automatically destroy her credibility. Also, the bias of her comment proves her one-sided opinion, which also ruins her believably. You can tell she wishes others to refrain from eating carbohydrates because she argues we don't need them at all. She does not provide any support for her argument.

2. The commenter believes in taking care of yourself; we can identify this through her argument that carbohydrates bring about disease. I also think she believes obesity is a major problem because she is trying to convince others to stop consuming carbs. She probably is concerned with diet and watches what she eats. 

3b. This commenter lacks credibility for me because of her bias. She uses very general assumptions and does not provide many examples to support her argument. In addition, she does not present her views in a very open way; therefore, I feel as though she would not even consider an alternative.  

 3. Credible Comment #2

Screenshot taken from The Atlantic. Nestle, Marion. Goodbye, Food Pyramid. May 31, 2011 via The Atlantic. Public Domain Dedication. 

1. Dmitriy's reply to Jeffery's comment seems adamant about correcting the argument. He believes Jeffery is incorrect in his information. We can identify this through Dmitriy's refutation of Jeffery's argument. He provides actual scientific facts and explanations of how the body physically reacts to carbohydrates. Because of his fervency, we can clearly distinguish that he wishes to prove to other commenters the inaccuracy of the statement that "we don't need carbs to survive."

2. I think Dmitriy believes in taking care of yourself. He has facts about how carbs affect the body which proves he has researched it. Also, he provides an argument that a "meat only diet" isn't the best way either. I also think Dmirtiy wants others to be well informed because he explains his position with scientific evidence. 

3a. This commenter is credible to me mainly because he utilizes actual facts. He has a well developed argument and thoroughly explains his viewpoint. Even though he is refuting another comment, he does not attack the person and only attacks the information, which is admirable and increases his credibility. In addition, he remains unbiased because he provides information on how the alternative "meat only diet" isn't beneficial to the body either.  

4. Comment with no Credibility #2

Screenshot taken from The Atlantic. Nestle, Marion. Goodbye, Food Pyramid. May 31, 2011 via The Atlantic. Public Domain Dedication. 

1. This commenter doesn't seem to be anxious about anything. However, it seems like he wished everyone to refrain from the consumption of carbs. He does not provide detailed, educated arguments; therefore, we can identify his general apathy to the issue. 

2. Anon believes that we should deviate from carbs by eating what "humans are supposed to eat." He believes that grains should be mainly for raising livestock. Because of this, we can identify that he probably cares about his diet as well as the well-being of other citizens. 

3b. Despite this commenter's humor, he loses all credibility for me. He does not provide explains or support for his viewpoint. His colloquial tone portrays him as uneducated and unreliable. His comment lacks depth and explanation.  In addition, he makes assumptions based on an observation, rather than facts. 

Reflection: The comments on Alyssa's post made me laugh. I can appreciate the fact that people voice their opinion's, regardless of the actuality of truth. Also, she clearly identifies why each comment is credible, or rather, lacks credibility. Her examples and explanations taught me what to look for in the future when I am perusing social media sites. Trey's post taught me how the values of America are fleeting. Some students in our generation feel as though the American flag is offensive. Some of the comments on his post are funny, though. I love seeing the First amendment in action too, so I don't mind reading comments that completely lack credibility.