Of fallacies and the local media

Our post-modern Western journalistic era operates mainly within the wider context of a utilitarian and relativistic society where individual rights on controversial issues such as abortion, surrogacy, legalisation of certain drugs and euthanasia take precedence over centuriesold absolute truths, values and laws. These issues are being lobbied for by Maltese individuals as well as pressure and lobby groups.

Many local bloggers and journalists, not to mention our political class, need to approach these delicate issues with a high level of journalistic maturity and knowledge of ethics. Therefore, it is no wonder that the subjects of Cyber-ethics and Bio-Ethics are growing in importance in today’s world and the need of putting forward arguments for intelligent discussion is created.

It is truly sad and unfortunate to notice that many writers and participants in discussions fall into the trap of several fallacies when discussing such sensitive matters. A fallacy is a kind of intentional or unintentional error in reasoning with the first known systematic study of fallacies attributed to Aristotle in his De Sophisticis Elenchis.

After the Dark Ages, fallacies were again studied systematically in medieval Europe. The third major period in fallacies began in the late 20th century due to renewed interest in the disciplines of Philosophy, Logic, Communications, Rhetoric, Psychology and Artificial Intelligence.

Past experience has shown that when sensitive legislation on divorce, same sex marriage and IVF was introduced in Malta, the use of fallacies to put forward arguments was very strong and the use of fallacies is still rampant in journalistic circles.

Some of the most common and sometimes inevitable fallacies debated on popular discussion TV shows and social media include appeals to emotion or pity. While it is important to empathise with individuals who suffered an injustice, one cannot base an argument or justify solely on the merits of emotion. If, for example, a woman has been raped and wants an abortion, her utilitarian and emotive reasoning is not enough to persuade others that abortion is an absolute legal right and intelligent and objective arguments go beyond such an appeal to pity or suffering. There is a potential life inside the womb and hence personhood that needs to be protected and given a voice as well.

Another fallacy that is commonly used is the appeal to authority. There are different kinds of authority. There is the authority coming from the opinion of the man/woman in the street and there is expert authority coming from professional researchers. While giving due attention to the man/woman in the street, it would be an injustice to base one’s opinion solely on this. Many of those men/women are invited to take part in discussion panels on many popular local TV shows but many opinions are based on mere sensationalism, emotion and amateurish opinions rather than on expert authority.

Perhaps the worst kind of fallacy that is so widespread locally is the use of the Ad Hominine fallacy. This means that instead of analysing the argument that the person is bringing forth, the journalist tends to attack the individual’s private life, character, integrity, honesty and credentials without even attempting to take account of the person’s arguments. Sometimes, unfortunately, the journalist includes in his/her character assassination attempts, the person’s children (even small children) when these poor innocent creatures have nothing to do with the argument in question.

Another ugly tactic is the fallacy known as scare tactics (or appeal to force) such as using blackmail in an attempt to instil fear and thus withhold information from coming out for public knowledge and interest.

Given this scenario, many local journalists need to be reminded of the huge responsibility they have, and how important it is to be educated not only intellectually by also morally and ethically. Moreover, participants in any debate or discussion panel should heed Herbert Paul Grice’s four maxims when analysing the dynamics of a conversation: Quantity is the exact information being brought to the dialogue; or is it a load of mumbo jumbo which is irrelevant and a waste of time? Quality – this underscores that information must be true, sincere, and not manipulative. Relative – the information must be relevant to the topic and not misleading. Manner – information must be presented clearly and not with anger and fallacies. Anthony Zarb Dimech Birkirkara