testing HAHAHAHA ganto ba?

Journal Entry #8: Guess That Fallacy Quiz

I recently learned in my Communication for Development class about logicial fallacies and how they can be used in arguments or debates, whether intentional or unintentional. 

I’m guilty in doing one or two of those fallacies when I argue or convince people so being aware of them is important. With this, I made a quiz where you guess that logical fallacy! 

Scenario 1: You either become a good attorney with good values or you become a corrupt person. It’s really one thing or the other.

Scenario 2: Phoenix Wright is not the best candidate for the job because he can get very heated in discussions and you don’t want that, do you?

Scenario 3: Detective Gumshoe was at the scene of the crime yesterday, and today the crime scene was gone. He must have committed the crime. 

Scenario 4: My lawyer friends don’t have a loving partner or are currently dating anyone, so maybe pursuing a career in law entails sacrificing your love life. 

Scenario 5: Every law student has seen the movie Legally Blonde or have played Ace Attorney, so those media must be a good representation of the justice system.

Individual Response to the 3 Readings, Module 0

1. What new insights have you gleaned from the three readings?

My main new insight is that now is the time that Development Communication and Communication for Development are all the more relevant and, if I may say, urgent.

Another worth mentioning is that just like in our other seemingly ordinary day-to-day realities, communication is formed through the interplay of social facts--norms, values, history, beliefs--leading me to the new formed realization that there is sociology of communication. In Section 1.5, it is stated that “We do not always recognize a culture when we see one. Cultures can overlap, absorb, encompass, and blend,” and much like the case in communication, which is also part of culture, it has become so normal to us that we don't immediately recognize its intricacies, which sociology gives us light to. In the end, we realize that all of which seemingly distant fragments are actually interconnected (SOCIO 101 and 102).

Lastly, as culture is expected to be the element of connection between community members, ironically “intranational communication can be far more cross-cultural than international communication,” to which the reading zooms in on the cultural gap between the elite and masses after. This relates to the ironic existence of both the formal and informal sectors in one developing country, to which this is termed as Dualism (DEV 101). It presents us that social class divides people more than nationality does, which I daringly pose as a problem. In application, this becomes a hindrance in engaging with pertinent beneficiaries and partner communities of different backgrounds. However, as I have learned in the recent ASEAN student exchange program which I had took part in, we Asians are more in community solidarity (e.g. Bayanihan culture) as compared to Western ideas that are much more individualistic. That being said, in contrast to a colonizer’s gaze of needing “competition” everywhere, to build a resilient, sustainable, and inclusive society, we need to learn from neighboring countries, and to do so, we must first put down the need for us to be divided by culture. Going back to intra-national relations, we must first let down our disparities as we have one goal at the end of the day--development.

2. What are the similarities among the three? The differences? Are there common themes?

From the tone of the readings, development is pictured as something that equates to modernization, which is not the case. The dominance of the technologically-advanced and homogeneous formal sector is not the sole measure of development. It is a common Western idea that has been adapted by other nations. "Defining development is an exercise of the imagination," meaning there is no one way of defining it thus is not supposed to be boxed in the general notions. That being said, modernity does not equate to development, but to be fair, "there is no development without modernity". Development is a reality that has not been made, but can be created (DEV 101).

Arcadian communities need not the intrusion of capitalistic principles and ideas when it is not being called for. For instance, Americanized Africa was when Americans insisted that Africans need to buy their machines in order to solve their crop production issue. This not only led Africans in debt, but also forced a need for them to adapt to modern technology, when their solution could have been land reforms which would yield them both healthier crops and a healthier community (DEV 101). Global North solutions are not Global South solutions, and vice-versa (SOCSCI 12)

Given that development is multi-faceted, a common theme that emerged in the readings, the power for social change should not be centralized to only policy-makers and higher establishments. It is time to listen and involve stakeholders, especially those from the grassroots, in the decision-making process! Media, however, which has become supposedly pocket-sized, accessible, and affordable nowadays, cannot all the time reach audiences of all walks of life, specifically those with low bandwidth and no access to the tools necessary for its consumption--time and resources (i.e. devices, internet connection, media literacy which is sharpened through education). In that sense, the government, media producers, and the general public still have control over how much information can certain people have access to. There is inequality in media. And that I believe makes Development Communication and Communication for Development all the more relevant.

Communication for development should not merely aim for raising awareness, rather it should push the envelope to proactive means for social change. It is not for speaking over the marginalized, but for amplifying their voices about their experiences of ostracization, limitations, discrimination, and inequalities to fuel the urgency of not only the development sector, but of the people. The goal is to have a well-informed dialogue that does not waterdown, romanticize, nor appropriate these struggles. To quote Sir Jayeel from tge Development Society of the Ateneo’s Advocates to Champions first ever Masterclass “The most successful movements in the world are grounded by the most powerful emotions”.

3. What concepts did you have difficulty understanding?

It is difficult for me to differentiate development journalism, development support communication, and why they cannot just fall under the same umbrella of Development Communication, especially since there is a lot of borrowing of terms, as stated in the reading.

I was also confused on how Communication for Development is different from Political Communication, however after briefly reading sources, I came to a conclusion. They are indeed both trans-disciplinary, design in such a way that gives specialization in its corresponding field. Perhaps a reason why I couldn't distinguish right away was because I'm used to considering politics as under the concept of development, when it deserves a whole new body of discussion itself.

Political Communication is geared at how the public administration will disseminate information to media platforms all the way to the general public. It is a top to bottom structure of communication.

Communication for Development is geared at how the development sector will mobilize stakeholders from the grassroots to address their concerns for social development, which also aims for the engagement of establishments and institutions towards achieving such. It is a bottom-up structure of communication.

— Kateleen Bautista

testinggg

blahblahbalhabhalhbal