When I first clicked on Antiwar.com and American Conservative, I was overwhelmed by the loads of information on the site. There is always false information going around in the news about specific topics. We have access to media no matter if it is accurate or false information. It covers information from all over the world which is very useful and cool to see. It has everything from highlights to breaking news and YouTube video attachments talking about the latest news, including Biden and Ukraine and other political news. The website contains information that you typically would not see on national headlining news. By reading these sites, I am becoming more educated on worldly news that I most likely would never find while scrolling on social media. But the real question is, why do we have to dig out information in order to hear strong antiwar voices.
The reasons why you would not see these websites when you search anything on the internet is because of backlash or threats. Antiwar.com has unedited and honest news and analysis. They do not edit or censor their content. They do not push their specific viewpoints into a protected template. A lot of stories and media these days focus on information that will result in higher viewership and will get more monetization. Sites like these are being covered up by news that will spark interest in the public because the "more important" news will make more money and create more attention. If it is not interesting enough, it will not get revealed to the public. The news likes to cover up information. It is getting more difficult to find voices that question and go against the media and investigates the truth. There is little to no mainstream coverage on antiwar because mainstream media is managed by huge companies who are mainly interested in their own interests and not on people who want social change. Anti-war voices are being silenced on purpose and large companies are wanting to control the media as they are getting in the way of spreading information from all sides.
From my personal stance, I believe that the government does not have an issue trying to mute different viewpoints that are not for what they think is right. We do not see most information and news sites because it is hidden from the public. America shows itself as a land for opportunities and where dreams come true but does not talk about the failures and concerns of human rights. There is news that gets covered up because it can ruin reputations and spark controversy.
The American Conservative website provides unbiased material. The layout of the site was more organized and not dispersed everywhere on the page to where it is super overwhelming. This website contains information about the future of American Conservatives, the past events, and there is even an article about The Conservative Wisdom of the Infield Fly. It is about how the infield fly rule, like the Senate filibuster, reflects the conservative impulse. I have never heard of these articles and events because the website is not pushed out to the public. The government has so much control over the news and only wants you to see certain topics. I believe the government makes big and popular companies, as well as sources like Google Scholar easy to access. Both the Antiwar and American Conservative website are vital to look back on because the information given is not typically seen on national news outlets.
Based on my observations and discoveries about the two websites, I realized that strong antiwar websites suffer by never getting the recognition the same way that pro-war voices do. Especially when doing research, we always want to hear both sides of the story and get specific viewpoints from each side so people can base their opinions upon that. People want to get factual and accurate news. We hear about people's opinions all the time which can turn into a big controversy because not everyone is going to agree with everything. I want to learn more about the opinions of others and be more open to listening to different stances on specific subjects. We need to be provided with a variety of viewpoints so we can make our own decisions about what we stand for and believe in. Being shoved away from all viewpoints would do us more harm and we need to make a change in order for voices to be heard.
No comments:
Post a Comment