Like, in a practical sense? Do you have any stories or examples from your life?

  • keepcarrot [she/her]@hexbear.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    So, when I think of “text”, I think of speech, audiobooks, film, as well as literal text etc etc. For instance, reading the Parenti quote and understanding its meaning would be the same as listening to someone say the Parenti quote and understanding its meaning.

    Which I thought this was about. If a politician says something, the ability to parse the layered meanings (usually, “this is the public thing I’m saying” and “these are the interest groups I’m signalling loyalty to”), and not like… Being able to read cooking instructions in text but being able to follow cooking instructions in a tiktok.

    • inv3r5ion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      What’s funny is I have a much easier time following text directions than video ones, unless it’s something that I need to visually see to understand.

      If you gave me a text about the civil war vs sent me some YouTube documentary about it, assuming both were well made, I’d prefer the text.

      • keepcarrot [she/her]@hexbear.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Depends, for me. Instructions I prefer text, cruise entertainment that I don’t have to reflect back on immediately, probably other forms

    • john_brown [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      I think the inability or unwillingness to actually read and process everything presented to them probably applies to the speech of politicians as well. They’re not paying attention to everything being said much less analyzing it critically.

      • keepcarrot [she/her]@hexbear.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        I feel like some processing is going on. They understand that the speech is signalling loyalty to interest groups, but they don’t actually remember the words said and also mistake the loyalty group being signalled (hence the “leopards ate my face” phenomenon, at least partly). This isn’t critical analysis, the belief that “politician is saying that for me!” and “politician is saying what we’re all thinking!” is the barest bones of processing. They do engage a bit more energy if a politician says something they openly disagree with.