Writing for alternative news media outlets, the editors allow readers to comment on articles in order to foster discussion on the issue and the point of the post. It never fails that one individual, sometimes a few more, will totally miss the point and produce an essay off topic. It gets rather frustrating sometimes when reading the comments to see if the point came across.
So, when the article, “Trump/Cruz Acting Like Children; America Deserves Better,” appeared on the news sites, a review of the comments sections on one site revealed that most individuals either missed the point of the article or chose to focus on another topic to either rant or vent anger at what they perceived was the point. The conclusion to draw here is two fold; either the article was weak on what the point is or the reader has a poor comprehension level.
Before blaming the reader, it’s important to review the article to discover where it was lacking in delivering the point. As it turned out, the point of the article was contained in the first sentence. However, when pointing out the lawyer who filed suit against Sen. Cruz claiming he is not a natural born citizen has questionable integrity, it may have gotten the point lost. The article returned to the point in the second paragraph after disclosing the plaintiff lawyer’s disbarment from practicing in two states.
Granted, the point of the article still remained in the attempt of the lawyer filing a lawsuit against Ted Cruz to hide his skeletons making himself appear to be an individual concerned for the nation. But, readers focused only on the lawsuit against Cruz then proceeding to explain why Cruz is not a natural born citizen, how Trump is doing his duty to point out Cruz’s ineligibility, and anyone questioning that is a traitor.
Obviously, some of these individuals have not read much of the articles written on Cruz’s ineligibility by the same author nor seen the backlash received for calling out Cruz for allowing ambition to rule his thinking to the point he is willing to discard his strict constitutional stance for his own personal gain.
The point is not the adverse comments by readers but how they arrived at the conclusion of the point of the article when it was clearly stated in two places. This means a failing of the author to clearly delineate for the reader what the intended point of the article was — the childish behavior of Trump and Cruz in using Twitter to do battle. In reviewing the tweets, one could see each side poking and jabbing the other like children in a sandbox on the playground.
One can see where the reader becomes confused when reviewing the article. When that happens, it’ important to recognize the role the author plays in guiding the reader to the intended point. If the author fails, the reader cannot truly identify what is needed to get the point. However, all is contingent on good reading comprehension by the reader. Not only must the transmission of the message be clear, the receipt of it by the individual needs to be clear as well.