Proof

I just came across a site which had a headline something like 'Jon Stewart PROVES that Tony Snow is a liar!', and a little way down the page was a blurb for an article about Ann Coulter proving that lesbianism is...something or other, I didn't finish reading even that short squib. Now, I like Jon Stewart -- but I do know that he'll spin images and commentary for humorous effect. I don't think that you can use much of what he says as proof of anything. When he has a clip of someone saying 'I never said xxx', and then another of that same person saying exactly that, then sure, thats proof -- but even there, you don't know that the clips weren't selected and edited for maximum impact. And as for Ann Coulter, well, I don't think you can use her for proof of much of anything other than that tall blonde women will get listened to. And not so tall -- right, Paris?

Collectively, though, it brought to mind a sequence I saw on the tube the other night. (Yes, I was actually watching television. Mark this date down.) It was a sort-of 'reality' show (I didn't watch the whole thing) wherein a debate coach was supposed to train a group of kids (call them disadvantaged; thats a nice way to put it) on the elements of debate, and then get them to win a debate meet. He said that there were rules about debating; you did not speak when it wasn't your turn, you did not make ad hominem attacks, you stopped talking (finished your sentence, and stopped) when your time was up. Then they showed one of these kids saying, scornfully, that this guy was a fool; in her debates, you never let the other person finish a sentence, you slimed them as much as you could; and you kept talking louder and louder until your opponent gave up.

I don't want to believe that thats how most kids think, but I believe thats what the popular culture tells them. Similarly, I don't want to believe that most people think that if Jon Stewart or Ann Coulter says 'here's proof', then that must be proof. Proof is something that may be substantially in the eye of the beholder, but not entirely so. You require verifiable facts, at the least. Loud talk, snappy patter, alone, don't hack it.