SELF-FULFILLING INTRODUCTIONS

I have heard phrases used, particularly contained in PBS programs such as “Nova” or “Front Line”, which I call “self-fulfilling introductions”.  These statements are intended to give an air of established truth to the content that follows them.  The introductory phrases appear to give authority to what comes next, as if to say, “let there be no question about this”.  They provide appearance of a reliable source, albeit an unnamed and unexplained source.  Here are some examples:

 - Research has shown . . .
 - Extraordinary new light indicates . . .
 - Science now knows . . .
 - New evidence has shown . . .
 - There is a new revelation that . . .
 - We now know . . .

One reason for using these phrases may be that the explanation about the nature of the source would be too lengthy to explain in a limited time and would distract from the subject to be presented.  However, there may be other reasons for the self-fulfilling introduction:

- What is to come is really based on theory, not fact.
- The source information does not clearly relate to the presented subject.
- The name of the source might be embarrassing or hard to justify.
- There is really no thorough knowledge about the subject.
- The presentation to follow is intended to argue or favor only one side of an issue that has opposing views.  Example:  Evolution vs. Creation.

Most of the time I like these shows.  If I didn’t like them, I would not watch them.  I do find, however, the pervasive use of the concept of evolution-as-fact annoying.  We must always be careful of what we take for truth and be aware of where it is coming from.  I suggest we modify such self-fulfilling phrases to:


 - Research suggests . . .
 - Extraordinary new light may indicate . . .
 - Science now seems to support . . .
 - New evidence may show . . .
 - There is a new revelation proposing that . . .
 - Some now think . . .