トピInformation, especially what must be taught and how, is vital concern to society. Some visionaries, including this topic, speak of a world in which any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, since it may well be proven false in the future. I agree with this topic that much of the information that people assume is factual actually turns out to be inaccurate. However, I am not deaf to the merits of the information brings to us, and I, therefore, insist that concepts of both information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted or trusted must be weighed appropriately.
To begin with, one reason for my fundamental agreement with this topic is as follows: in order for people to acquire proper information, the source of information and how people accept the information must be made clear. Simply put, information exists among people in an organization or society where the members share common interest or goals. Although examples can be presented in a plethora of ways, two that aptly illustrate this point involve the areas of politics.
Consider first a case of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted. Political leaders tend to manipulate citizens for their politics decisions. In Japan, during World War II, Japanese emperor decided to participate in the war and agitate his people through mass media. After World War II his decision be proven false. Much the same kind of incidents can be happen in other country. Julian Paul Assange leaked many top secrets about United States' diploma, which referred to as a fact, but prove to be false after the leak. It is clear as shown by these two examples that information was distorted by mass media and government.
I believe, as stated above, that information referred to as a fact should be trusted is the very foundation upon which citizens can acquire information easily and directly. However, I insist that one must embrace the principle that citizens should not believe mass media directly and they should search many information about the situation by themselves. It is important that each individual learns the fact that both mistrusted or trusted constitute information offered by mass media or government, and bereft of one of the two, no full-fledged information can be fostered, let alone accomplished.
Why might this be so? The simple answer is this: no longer does it make sense to think of the notions of mistrusted or trusted information as separate entities, for they coexist in society, inextricably bound with each other. If one were to return to the mass media example discussed above, a rationale of my assertion becomes clearer.
Any mass media, whether it is a news paper or a news TV program, operate their business in an environment in which a certain degree of competition exists. To sell their own products, they must outmaneuver competitors. Exaggeration, embellish a story, make up a news report, they use these ways to attractive more viewers; there are various ways by which they can excel in the field of their business. But mass media needs to broadcast trusted information as well as mistrusted one. For example, scientific invention, Olympic games and so on.
In sum, instilling a concept of information into citizens for certain purpose may look bad. This is true and on this point, I agree with this topic. However, focusing solely on the mistrusted information is fallacious within the framework of a broader perspective, especially in a pluralistic society where monistic approaches fail to solve a given problem. I do not think any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, nor do I think that information referred to as a fact should be trusted. It's depends on the mess media or government to how to represent the information and how citizens' personality.(640 words)
