The way they have couched these questions to include double negatives and particular terminology is not only insulting to me as an English major and a scientist who cares about statistical validity, but terrifying.
They use a lowercase “media” when they are actually referring to particular news outlets or mainstream media in general, but refer to their political party as “our Party” as if it is a person, an important proper noun, something Greater in Purpose.
They don’t ask “do you think the media needs to do more fact-checking” they ask “do you think the media is too quick to spread false stories,” which asks you not to judge the stories, but the speed at which they spread. In order to answer yes or no, you must accept that the stories are false as a given. They’ve couched their preferred terms and opinions inside of other topics in order to sway non-critical thinkers subconsciously. They’re further polarizing their power base, making their followers distrust all news sources that disagree with the Party. This is a very effective and sneaky tactic that will make it so, so much more difficult to sway any of their supporters away with facts or logic.
This is terrifyingly extremist. I could spend hours picking this apart, but it would just be an in-depth example of careful phrasing. Take a good hard look at this.
gamechangershow
amandla
titsay
jimmyeatworldofficial
yousharknotpass
