Telling the Truth syallabus points (1 Viewer)

[ben]

I just read the english syallabus for the first time!

It says:

Elective 1: Telling the truth

In their responding and composing, students consider representations of the truth. They explore the processes by which statements come to be accepted as true, question who has the authority to makes those statements and examine the ways in which those statements are explored, tested and endorsed or refuted.

Hmmm... now if we got a questions like:

Analyse the processes by which statements come to be accepted as true.

OR

Evaluate who has the authority to make those statements.

OR

Exame the ways in which those statements are explored, tested and endorsed or reruted.

How would we write an answer to one of those??

 

[elfgal]

well, in terms of Frontline...
for the 1st one, highlight the importance of vision in tv/current affairs (brian mamms on about this at every given opportunity), then say that he probably thinks vision is so great in a news show coz it suggests accuracy/truth..there are an indefinite no. of cliches to support this (eg seeing is believing; the camera never lies etc etc)..people have opinions whereas an image is (in itself) unbiased. it tends to be subjected to behind the scenes manipulation, but that tends to go undetected. you could say that even though frontline highlights that images are not necessarily 'truthful', it is presented in such a way that audiences are likely to believe its images, which demonstrates how deeply this misconception is entrenched in the attitudes of tv viewers (i think i've stopped making sense already). ok that's not really about processes...i guess ppl come to believe through validation. so to be convincing you have to have evidence, or concoct it if you don't. eg in the seige brian wants a psychologist, but can't get one so settles for a bearded mature-age student in front of a bookcase. 'evidence' can be in the form of many small clues that come together to create a certain ambiance - eg marty crouching and wearing a flak jacket when reporting from the seige site, to convey a feeling of danger, even though he's 5k away...

the 2nd one: i have no idea. i will just die if we get that question...but yeah, i guess ppl who 'look the part' - eg the psychology student from the seige has an air of credibility coz of his mature appearance, therefore ppl are more likely to believe him than someone who looks 'less intellectual', even if theyre intellectually superior. like in that simpsons episode where homer's hair grows back & he gets promoted and then it all falls out again and nobody takes him seriously...hey, cool i have an extra supplementary text...

q3..well i thought of stuff before, but i just forgot it. i think i'll go panic about complete lack of knowledge exacerbated by premature short term memory loss and a firm conviction in the certainty of my failing these exams..god help me..oh shit i'm not religious..

 

[bex]

Evaluate who has the authority to make those statements.

Smaller Fish to Fry is a good example for this question... Even though Mike is going after the big bank story and it could be a breakthrough story for Frontline, Brian has to protect themselves from the repercussions of that from his bosses and also the government. In the same episode, Emma and Brooke try to do an interview with the PM.. but before it can happen, the questions must be analysed and approved.. thus controlling what the public sees/hears.

The one with the Lesbian story.. is that Add Sex and Stir?? Im not sure but what right does Brooke have to re-write the questions she asked to the sport woman (i cant remember her name!) whats more, in order to protect herself she sends the chick off to QLD!

In the instance of that question, i think you need to examine the questions of Power.. similar to the Powerplay module...

 

[ben]

Thanks!