How are distinctions made between factual reporting, interpretation and distortion?
How are distinctions made between factual reporting, interpretation and distortion?
This essay is going to tell the differences between factual reporting, interpretation and distortion. Factual reporting means that an answer or a statement is based on facts that are true and proven. Interpretation is an individual’s opinion and appreciation about a subject. It is not based on facts but just on opinions and theories. Distortion is a way of delivering wrong information, twisted and wrongly explained information. It is based on facts but kind of turns them around.
Factual reporting is the way of delivering an opinion/theory based on true facts. An example of this is an article I read in Metro today, which was about conspiracies. The one that caught my eye was one that stated that an airplane never crashed into the Pentagon. This theory was based on facts, which I never had heard of. For example, the surveillance camera of the Pentagon didn’t show an airplane but only a white line in the sky. Another thing was that the hole in the Pentagon was way too small to have been creased by an airplane. The write stated that the US Air force shot down flight 77, and to cover this up they blew up a part of the building without the workers knowing anything about it. Also no big wreck parts from the plane were found. This is a factual reporting as it’s based on true facts and it not created by opinions or own thoughts as in an interpretation. Also the moon landing is believed to be a fake. There are many facts that point against it. In a video ‘from the moon’ the flag that Neil Armstrong put up was waving in the wind. And there’s not supposed to be any wind on the moon. Also the shadows go in different directions and the shadow of the space shuttle should fall on Armstrong, a good example of factual reporting. A theory based on facts.