Research Assignment #19: How to analyze a communiqué issued for the public consumption For the Departments of English & Media Studies by Prof Dr Sohail Ansari

A communiqué is issued

 The King does not pardon a person condemned for having committed a defiant noncompliance of the royal commands. The queen interceded with the king on behalf of the person sentenced, as she always with informed consent, to fill the moral vacuum.

Ergo, A King though never condones by any means what constitutes a beach of an oath of fealty, submitted himself to the pleas of queen.

‘A man, who has no sense of history ’Hitler declared, ‘is like a man who has no ears or eyes’.

Similarly

If one buys a communiqué without analyzing, he has no mind.

We should not buy a communiqué before having the answers of a few questions; for example:

·         Who is the condemned person?

·         Why is he condemned?

·         To what extent the stated reason: Queen’s interposition is justified?

·         Did a King pardon because of the queen? Or there was any other reason? Or was it one of the reasons?

To answer the above questions we need to find out about:

·          The king and the royal family

·         Ruling class or people belonging to the upper echelons associated with a king and a royal family

·         The situation in a country.

·         The condemned person.

Common people are chosen for soliciting information/answers of questions because:

·         People capture the foundation for the famous formulation that democratic government is “of the people, by the people and for the people.” In essence, they mean just that: governments belong to the people; governmental processes belong to the people; and elections belong to the people.

·         People are the best judge; therefore, we need to find out what people feel (anger, happiness, love, hatred) about the king and the ruling class and about themselves (what subjects think about the status of subjects).

The king is excluded because:

·         A communiqué is issued in a country that is ruled by the unconstitutional monarch. This means that, the Sovereign is not only the Head of State; but also the ability to make and pass legislation resides with him (there is no elected Parliament). 

·         Dictators don't rise to power for the good of their nations (though they usually claim otherwise).

·         Similarly a monarch doesn’t stay in power for the good of their nations (though they usually claim otherwise).

·         The king is not to be solicited because kings are like a good spy who does not appear to be a spy.

·         Never revealing his true self, king will respond as a noble king bent on serving people out of altruism.

Others are excluded because:

·         A dictatorship is a form of government characterized by the absolute rule of one person or a very small group of people who hold all political power.

·         This Monarchy is no different from dictatorship that is a form of government characterized by the absolute rule of one person or a very small group of people who holds all political power.

·         The Sovereign is supported by members of their immediate family, a clique of henchmen and a coterie of apple-polishers, and grovellers toadying to him.

The inner circle of a king is not to be solicited because they have the vested interests in the rule of a king; and because:

·         The royal family and a clutch of sycophants and doormats

are cosseted; mollycoddled, pampered, wrapped in cotton wool they are cocooned against the grim realities of a country; therefore, they are absolutely  divorced from the people:  camarilla  has lost any sense of political and social reality.

We devise a questionnaire because:

·         In monarchy, a king is at the helm of affairs and the average  people have no say in any matter and they feel in the words of Obama ‘the average person feels their voice doesn’t matter; that the system is rigged in favor of the rich or the powerful or some narrow interest’.

·         It does not matter what average persons think; therefore; in monarchy, a monarch can be inattentive and unheeding who never listens because he hears remonstrances and complaints without trying to hear them

We can listen through questionnaire that contains both quantitative and qualitative questions.

Content analysis

It can matter what average persons think; Voices can be alarming, the perceptions themselves can become a source of fear, if acquire symbolic potential that has mass appeal; the near ubiquitous approval and skyrocketing relevance.

Therefore:

Media are muzzled to suppress the potential.

Shannon L. Alder says:

·         “Intelligence is not expecting people to understand what your intent is; it is anticipating how it will be perceived.” 

 

For our purpose, we modify it: Intelligence is expecting us to understand what the speaker intent is; it is perceiving how he anticipates us to do so. 

Joyce Rachelle says:

 

·         “There is more to hear in what is not said.” 

 

Words of Joyce are very much relevant when media are gagged.

 

We are to do content analysis of the programs of media.

 

Reading between the lines

But for hearing unsaid we need to learn ‘Reading between the lines’’ for understanding the meaning that underlies the apparently obvious meaning of written or spoken words.

We find Quora best for our purpose that interprets the skill of "reading between the lines"? and explain how one can develop it.

‘Reading between the lines is extracting from prose a meaning other than that which is most obvious. Reading between the lines requires deep contextual understanding.

For example, here's a sample sentence:
"Get your ass out of here"

In itself, the sentence stands open for a multiple interpretations. What if I tell you that this was said by a friend to another friend? What if I tell you that this was said by a disgruntled professor to a student? What if I tell you that this was said by a young girl, too young in fact, to be using the word 'ass' ? We derive some information from the knowledge of who mouthed these words.

Now, what if I tell you that the friend who spoke this wasn't laughing - that he said this in the calmest voice he could - perhaps, with edge of a tremble? What if I tell you that the disgruntled professor spoke these words while swallowing a laughter? What if I tell you that young girl who spoke these words was merely mimicking her mother who commonly uses this phrase while talking to her husband? What if I tell you that whenever the mother uses this phrase, she has a smile on her face but the daughter spoke these words with a frown on hers? The emotional context matters too.

Generally, there's other information that you know about - historical data that might infuse some weight into this particular sentence. Reading between the lines is this process of understanding the meaning of a sentence or a prose in the context of all the information that you might already have been exposed to earlier through various means. Remember that not all of the information that you may use to derive this additional meaning from would come from the prose directly. You may draw inferences from personal stereotypes, from common tropes and archetypes, cultural influences etc. The process is not always conscious. You already have a bunch of vague points dotted in the landscape of your mind. When a new point arrives, it excites few of the existing points and new connections are almost automatically made - thereby re-organizing the points and the connections.

So if you were to ask another person out on a date, for example, and the person declines, one could "read between the lines" of the response to determine what they think of you.

For example, try reading between the lines of the following two rejections:

"I'm sorry I can't come tonight because I have a prior unbreakable engagement, but here's my cell phone number. Call me!"

and

"I'm sorry I can't come tonight, but I'm really busy this summer. In fact, the rest of the year doesn't look too good either. But thanks for asking."

Reading between the lines' means the skill of comprehending what the person is trying to indicate but not stating it in exact words.

 How can you develop it?

Pay attention to the body movements and small gestures the person is making while talking. For example a person is looking away, yawning or playing around with his phone when you are talking to him means he/she is not interested in that conversations at that time. Or sometimes people ask you for help in trivial issues while actually they are indicating that they want you to be involved with them is some way.

Basically pay attention to detail and slowly one gets better with experience. To "read between the lines" is to pick up on subtleties of connotation / word choice, or when someone's body language, nonverbal communication and actions are incongruent with what they are saying.

Develop concentration
2. Enter an assumption-free state of mind...carry no preconceived notions..be an empty cup (in zen terminology). Then your mind might have greater and more path breaking insights on the meaning, implication and application of the text than even the writer in some cases’

We devise a questionnaire

 It can matter what average persons think; therefore:

·         To stifle any political change that can upset status quo, people are simply tyrannized, cowed into silence and browbeaten and bludgeoned into submission.

·         Opinions on important ethical and political issues are stifled in deference to a king

·         Consensuses are exacted from stifling debates or arm-twisting by state whips.

Or

·         Authority figures require that a person justifies his or her opinion comes perilously close to coercion.

Through quantitative and qualitative questions we tend to discover stifled opinions and the real consensuses.

We devise a questionnaire

It does not matter what average persons think but voices can be nuisance; therefore:

·         In monarchy grievances are not permitted to be aired, ventilated and articulated.  Voices are not heard because a monarch does not want ‘uncomfortable sounds’ come to his ears bothering him to pay attention and listen.

Through quantitative and qualitative questions, we tend to listen unheard voices and uncomfortable sounds.

We devise a questionnaire

Louis XIV brought France to its peak of absolute power and his words 'L'etat c'est moi' ('I am the state') express the spirit of a rule in which the king held all political authority. Because of this absolutism, people never bring themselves into conflict with a king as they know it will have the damaging repercussions.

·         The voices of people are muffled under a blanket of amorphous words and phrases - without a clearly defined shape or form.

We will break through silence, artificial consensus, and imposed agreement try to give defined shape or form to amorphous words and phrases to know what they mean through questionnaire that contains qualitative questions.

We are not concerned with:

How to know what they say is actually truth; or in other words, thing is as what they say so.

Therefore,

         

We do not judge the validity of truth by using truth/lie performance as a competence/assessment measure

Hence, we do not investigate truth through typical forensic truth/lie discussions or control discussions.

We believe that Truth is singular. Its “versions” are mistruths

But for our case, the respondent’s version of the truth is all that matters.

There is the deliberate ignorance on our part of the possibility that answer may not the spontaneous response of what a respondent think is true but the deliberate and premeditated lie.

 existence.

Exercise:

·         ‘We should not buy a communiqué before having the answers of a few questions’ why we should not buy?

Give reasons

·         ‘We should not buy a communiqué before having the answers of a few questions’ do you think we can eliminate any of the question and it won’t make any difference.

·         ‘We should not buy a communiqué before having the answers of a few questions’ Add more question or questions.

·         To answer the above questions we need to find out about’ why we need to find out about?

·         ‘To answer the above questions we need to find out about’ add one or more points to find out about if you feel so.

·         The author quotes Obama to endorse one of his assumptions; but the assertion of Obama is itself unsubstantiated by facts and figures. Tell why?

·         Assertion alone can be sufficient in and of itself. If it is of……… …. Complete the sentence

 

An author of this article is to devise questions intended to discover what people feel about the governance of a country and consequently how they feel: Happy, angry, sad, frustrated, contended etc.

Question:      The word feel is used two times.

Do you think it gives one or two meanings?

A doctor may devise questions intended to discover what people feel and how they feel; for example if they feel a pain or headache so how they feel: throbbing, mild or excruciating.

Question:      If an author of this article devises questions in a way a doctor does so what his research intends to discover? 

Ph Philosophy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for those interested in the study of the f of, reality, and existence.

‘There is the deliberate ignorance on our part of the possibility that answer may not the spontaneous response of what a respondent think is true but the deliberate and premeditated lie’.

Question:

Why an author says: ‘what respondent think’?

If what a respondent think is not true so it is a lie but not…       complete a sentence.

 Question:

How can we ascertain that answer fail to portray characterize real happenings.

If answers fail so should we equip our respondents with information?

If we should then why and if we should not then why?

If we equip so what information we give and how? 

·         Write in a bullet form the common thread that runs through the various explanations of ‘Reading between lines’

·         Answer of Quora is full of fascinating insights into the art of reading between the lines. Apply these insights in content analysis of a program. Choose any program from

 TV Channels of Saudi Arabia and try to hear unsaid about ‘The House of Saud’

·         How justified you think the assertion (of author) is about Quora.

·         An author says: ‘We find Quora best for our purpose’ we infer from the word best, that he must have gone through good and better before choosing the best.

Can you tell what could be good and better?

·         Writer has not given any reasons for his decision of the use of content analysis. Give reasons to tell his decision is justified or not.

What kinds of TV programs a researcher should watch? Political? Or Non political?

Question:

Do you think watching Entertainment program can give any benefit?

 

Instructions:

 

Read the ‘New world information order’ and see the influence of entrainment shows on sparking the desire for political change.  For example:

Nicolae Ceaușescu was the Romanian dictator. He suppressed and controlled the media and press, implementing methods that were among the harshest, most restrictive and brutal in the world; but he was lenient toward entertainment programs and himself was fond of Kojak.

These program exposed the people of Soviet Union to the lives of the people of the West. Indeed, so great was the realization of the economic potential that people of the Soviet Union were not only dazzled and mesmerized by it but also convinced by it.

There is nothing more coveted by them than the things of the material world of the West that intrigue, things that generate sensual excitement, things that grab hold and simply will not let go.

 

 

 William Shakespeare called public opinion the 'mistress of success'

 Blaise Pascal thought it was 'the queen of the world.'

William Temple    in his essay of 1672, On the Original and Nature of Government gave an early formulation of the importance of public opinion

John Locke   in his treatise An Essay Concerning Human Understanding considered that man was subject to three laws: the divine law, the civil law, and most importantly in Locke's judgment, the law of opinion or reputation.

Suppose there is the emergence of public opinion as having singular significance in the political realm and a considerable influence for a king, thus acting as a binding force between the rulers and the ruled.

Press is not muzzled and the ill opinions of masses can compel a King to conform his behavior.

Question:

 

·         What then will be programs we need to watch?

·         Do we need to read between lines?  

·         What difference will be in findings then?

Question:

·         ‘There is the deliberate ignorance on our part’

·         What deliberate means in a context?

There are so many assumptions, an author makes; conclusions follow therefore.

Question:

·         Imagine assumptions turn out to be wrong. Re write assumptions and conclusions.

·         In quoting words 'L'etat c'est moi' an author makes one assumption about a king.

Question:

·         What is that assumption?

·         Do you think it is unwarranted and it can be challenged? Justify with reasons whatever you think.

Question:

·         Add words to improve lines ‘It does not matter’ those follow immediately the mentioning of Louis XIV

Question:

·         If voices are not permitted to be aired then how the voices of people can be muffled?

·         Do you think an author does not use the word voice in a literal sense?

·         An author of this article does not write a methodology therefore the mentioning of methods is scattered throughout. How do you think about the way of writing? Read research articles and see how they mention methods.

·         This article does contain delimitation but there is no heading of it.

Choose lines and put them under the heading ‘delimitation’

 ‘People have no say in any matter and they feel in the words of Obama ‘the average person feels….’

‘(The average person" is a common phrase that, taken as a unit, has the described understood meaning; we mean a commoner). "It would take the average person 10 days to read this novel"

Or

·         "It would take an average person 10 days to read this novel"

·         When you mean something specific. Use a/an when you mean something in general.

·         In your case, both sentences make sense. I think the difference is that the first example focuses on specific average person, while the second example on a person in general. You may need to refer back to the original context before telling which is better.

The first doesn't necessarily refer to a specific person. (It could, but that seems quite unlikely for this particular sentence.) You have grossly oversimplified the use of the definite article in your answer, which has other uses besides the one you've touched on here – something I tried to address (somewhat whimsically) in it’.

 

Question:

 

·         If the average person" is a common phrase that, taken as a unit, has the described understood meaning. What do you think an author of this research mean by the average person?

 

·         Why do you think we need to define terms; such as this one: average person.