The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
In other words, only when a statement or discourse is in direct contradiction with itself and immediate reality can we reach the guys at the other side of our enlightenment narrative/mythology. But we have to reach them, otherwise, they will forget.
Often, LTEs are simple statements of disagreement with a published piece, followed by a statement of the LTE writer's pet theory. That is ineffective. The best LTEs are the ones that concisely expose a contradiction in the narrative of the article they respond to. If that can be used as a cue to present an alternative narrative, so much the better, but it is the exposed contradiction that makes the alternative narrative more convincing.
So our LTE writing should be focused on exposing internal contradictions in the prevailing narrative.
Now, should we be targeting the opposition's media, or our own side's? In other words, is it best to sow uncertainty and doubt among the consumers of right-wing media, so as to weaken their allegiance to the cause, or else to protecting a friendly audience from what we think are dangerous narratives?
In the case at hand, the readers at publico.es, at least the ones that commented on the news item that kcurie is quoting, either caught on to the inherent contradiction or at least saw that the narrative didn't match their experience. Therefore an LTE to publico.es might not have been very effective in terms of changing readers' opinions. Maybe it would have been more effective to track down the same piece in Expansion or Cinco Dias (Spain's financial newspapers) or the right-wing press (ABC, El Mundo), or even El Pais (the largest newspaper in the country and increasingly finance-friendly despite its left credentials).
When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
Op-Ed , on the other hand should be a anrrative from the start.. taking shots at contradictions of teh opposite narrative.
Now, we need a media outreach.. :)
And El Pais would eb the target newspaper.. or El Mundo... Razon .. I doubt it...
I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact.
For most audiences you have to be able to make your point in a single sentence. Everything else in the op-ed is the carrier, but the maximum impact comes from that one sound-bite sized sentence of payload.
Kos is actually good at this - most of his front page comments look like throw-aways, but in fact they're very distilled one-two punches nailing a point or two.
One one I'm working on at the moment includes some talky fluff with comments from Greenspan and others, and a 'So why is it that economists are so very bad at managing money?'
El Mundo would be less receptive but still they like to think themselves as centrists and rationalists...
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 21 1 comment
by gmoke - Feb 28
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 19 1 comment
by Oui - Feb 18 33 comments
by Oui - Feb 8 3 comments
by Oui - Mar 33 comments
by Oui - Mar 21 comment
by Oui - Mar 19 comments
by Oui - Feb 2926 comments
by Oui - Feb 2911 comments
by Oui - Feb 29
by gmoke - Feb 28
by Oui - Feb 2820 comments
by Oui - Feb 2815 comments
by Oui - Feb 27
by Oui - Feb 2611 comments
by Oui - Feb 261 comment
by Oui - Feb 256 comments
by Oui - Feb 243 comments
by Oui - Feb 233 comments
by Oui - Feb 23
by Oui - Feb 227 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 211 comment
by Oui - Feb 2122 comments
by Oui - Feb 203 comments