Question

Please read this paragraph and answer these questions
QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION
1. Carlson gives evidence of the decline in public discourse by summarizing an
incident in which a talk radio host crossed the line of decency by failing to
respect a person whose ideas differed from his and his listeners’. Why is it
important to maintain civility toward those with whom you disagree?
2. What influences does Carlson see as contributing to a decline in public discourse,
especially the decline in the quality of arguments? Do you agree? Can
you think of other influences?
the paragraph:

Fighting Words: Why Our Public
Discourse Must Change
KELBY CARLSON
Americans have always loved to argue. From our country’s founding, debates over
political principles, the nature of government, and the relation between liberty and
equality have been vigorously and vociferously argued. The most famous debates of
our country’s history were perhaps the Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1860. In some
(though only some) respects, it was a time quite like our own: Americans were polarized
(over, obviously, the nature of slavery) and the rapidly deteriorating relations
between Northern and Southern states (with some secession and more yet to come)
caused no end of consternation. A quick study of those debates, however, reveals
that both candidates for the presidency in 1860 had rhetorical skills that few today
can match: their debate points sound like they’ve been ripped straight from a political
treatise.
Today’s landscape of argument is quite different. Technology has radically
re-
shaped the ways in which discourse is connected in public life. Television transformed
a word-oriented culture into one more focused on images; the recent advent
of social media, by contrast, brought words back—and made the process of argument
more public than ever before. In the wake of these changes lies a landscape of
sound bite polemic and rhetorical politics desperately in need of re-appraisal. I’d like
to offer a case in point (with which readers will likely be quite familiar) and a couple
of suggestions on where things went wrong and how to chart a new course.
In early February [2012], a new amendment to health care legislation began the
process of working its way through Congress. This amendment modified employer
requirements and would mandate that private institutions include medical contraceptives
in their health care plans. Almost immediately, an outcry arose among private religious
institutions, spearheaded by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Furthered by Rick Santorum’s opposition to the amendment, an increasing groundswell
of public opinion developed on both sides of the debate. Later that month, Sandra
Fluke, a first-year law student at Georgetown University, testified before the Senate
regarding the legislation and made a case for compliance (particularly at schools).
This may not have been national news if it were not for a number of incendiary
comments by well-known talk-radio kingpin Rush Limbaugh. In his comments,
Limbaugh called Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” and insinuated that Fluke should
be required to videotape herself having sex for Limbaugh (and those like him) to
watch. This led to almost immediate outrage, with many of Limbaugh’s sponsors
quickly pulling their advertisements and public opinion supporting the sponsors’
decisions.
This is a case-in-point of the kind of public discourse we see regarding both
important and unimportant issues and showcases the good and the bad in American
public life. First, the bad: Limbaugh’s comments were inappropriate and offensive on
every level imaginable. From publicly shaming Ms. Fluke to more generally placing
sexual objectification on women, his acidic remarks reveal deep problems with the
way many in America see sex, gender, and their intersections with politics, regardless
of what anyone believes about this specific legislation. But, there is a glimmer
of hope in this situation: Social media allowed the public instantly and massively to
pressure sponsors to respond. Even ten years ago, a mass reaction this visible and
immediate would not have been possible.
If I were more cynical, I could list dozens of examples from both left and right,
from inappropriately sexualized attacks to caricatures that would make most cartoonists
blush. But a more important question is: How did we get here?

Answer 1

Answer (1) : Human beings are the most developed and evolved living beings on planet earth. This evolving nature of the human beings have taken them far ahead in the race with other loving organisms towards more socialized, cultured and sophisticated living environment. One of the critical features that differentiates the humans from other animals is behavior and the ability to respond to an incident. However, in spite of being tremendously developed, human beings are now slowly losing the inherent quality of being more civil in their nature, which in the first place differentiated them from other animals. Civility is the base on which our society survives. It is this civil nature of the men, that has ensured its prolonged existence on the planet. However, with the passage of time, we have lost our sense of civility and social behavior. There could be many instances where we may disagree with others whether in public or in private. However, we must ensure that in the course of the argument we should not cross the limit of civility. If civility diminishes, we will be no better than other animals. A civil behavior in most cases helps resolving an issue at a much quicker rate than being uncivil. Uncivilized behavior is the cause of many fight across the conversations, When we maintain civility, we thereby enhance the social longevity of the nation.

Answer (2) : Carlson sees the abusive words spoken by the talk-Radio kingpin Rush Limbaugh to a first-year law student, Sandra Fluke, of the Georgetown university. Rush was unimaginably abusive when he abused Sandra on sexual orientation and questioned the character of Sandra on a public platform. This nature of Rush highlighted the nature of the American upper middle class, as to how their view of sex was. This also highlighted how deep down, the society has now lost the basic understanding to respect a woman and more so in public domain.

                        The other influence was the huge support provided by the other section of the society to the broadcasting sponsors of Rush’s talk show. The general people started to raise their voice against the comments made by Rush, which forced the broadcasting sponsors to stop sponsoring Rush’s show. This unity among the people was the effect of the social media advancement. Social media has in today’s world grown as a critical social influencing tool. Social media, like in this case, can also be used to protect our society from falling prey to the many cropping up social evils.