How Many Manys Must A Man Listen To
Before he unleashes a rant? Dave e-mails to vent:
I've reached the final point of no return with the MSM. Russert does it. Georgie does it. Ted does it. Gibson does it. Most network reporters do it. Lefties do it when they want to kill a conservative point.
What is it they are doing? They represent the perspective they are reporting on by quantifying it with the magical preciseness of "MANY".
They are doing it when the report on the new Pope. Many Germans are concerned about the new Pope. Many American Catholics are upset with the new Pope.
Is "Many" less than "Most"? Is Many a lazy way to infer "Most"? (We never said most, we said many.)
Often, they use the term "MANY" when they want to state a negative (as opposed to making a positive point) in either a report or a debate. Many has become fact instead of myth.
What constitutes many? 3 out of 100? 20 out of 40? 100 out of 10,000? 800 showing up to an antiwar rally in a city of 2,000,000? I would think 800 out of 2,000,000 is closer to a "very few". (Stastically, zero)
How do they know if the position and supporters they are reporting on is a groups of "many"?
They never have to state how MANY are the MANY they refer too. Just "Many".
Talk about relativism! "Many" is the new "trick word" replacing both "basically" and "frankly".
I'm sure that many of our readers would agree with Dave on this one.