If you send your children to a classical school, they are likely to learn about the various types of rhetorical fallacy. And this is far more likely to help them become informed citizens than any course a public school could offer in “media literacy.”

A classically educated student could instantly spot the fallacy at work in this CNN Headline: “Florida Principal Let Go After Failing to Notify Parents About Lesson on Michelangelo’s David.” The fact that this is a headline at all invites readers to assume that this classical charter school principal was let go because of her failure to notify parents about a lesson on David. But: Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc. The fact that a second event followed a first does not mean that the first caused the second.

Indeed, the CNN story provides enough facts to belie the fallacious assumption invited by the headline. The principal told CNN, “my board chair has not been happy with me,” because she did not always follow policies and procedures, and said that this discontent had been escalating for a year. The board chair told CNN, “She was not let go because of Michelangelo’s David lesson.” The chair said that they showed that picture every year to students, but in the past had notified parents of sixth graders about the nudity. This time, the teacher asked that parents be notified but the principal did not, which put the school in a bad position when two parents complained about the lack of notification and a third complained that the teacher had characterized the statue as ‘non-pornographic’ and told students not to tell their parents that they were shown it. But “Principal Fired After Latest Incident in a Pattern of Not Following School Policy” wouldn’t make for much of a news story.

Instead, we got a slate of comparable headlines from other outlets. Last week we had from Education Week: “After a Lesson on Michelangelo’s David, a Florida Principal Loses Her Job.” From the AP: “Principal Resigns after Complaints on ‘David’ Statue Nudity.” From CBS: “Florida School Principal Resigns After Complaints over ‘Pornographic’ David Sculpture.” This week a tweet engendered a new round of stories, for instance from CBS: “Italian Mayor Tweets Invitation to Florida Principal Who Resigned After Parents Complained Michelangelo’s David was Taught in School.”

To its credit, the liberal Slate magazine published an interview with the school board chair, who insisted that “this wasn’t about that one issue,” and that “we didn’t even discuss that issue at the special board meeting,” to accept her resignation. “The issue,” he insisted, “isn’t whether children should see these pictures or not. Gosh, we’re a classical school. Why wouldn’t we show Renaissance art to children?” The real issue, he stressed, was that the policy wasn’t followed. “And again,” he said, “no one has a problem with David. It’s not about David.” “You’re determined,” he accused the journalist, “to make this a story about David. You’re going to give it the mainstream media slant.” To Slate’s credit, they did not. The Washington Post, on the other hand, slanted into outright falsehood with the title: “

Florida Parents Upset by Michelangelo’s ‘David’ Force Out Principal.” Nothing has been reported to suggest that parents pushed for or even requested the principal’s ouster. Why was it reported like that? Well, the “parental backlash,” as the Post characterizes three complaints, “comes at a time when the state’s K-12 and higher education is possibly being reshaped through a spate of new Republican-sponsored bills that have been championed by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a potential Republican presidential candidate in 2024.” The real reason this story scored so many headlines was because the fact-pattern could be contorted to fit a political narrative. This all raises a larger question in the context of an increasing drive for teaching “media literacy” in public schools: How exactly could a case study like this be taught? Pointing out that mainstream media is happy to manufacture headlines at odds with the fact patterns they report in the service of political narratives would be unacceptably partisan to many parents. By the same token, telling students to weigh the reporting of the Washington Post (here the worst actor) more heavily than other outlets would be unacceptably partisan to many others. Rather than wade into the unavoidably politicized waters of “media literacy,” public schools should consider taking a cue from classical charter schools by offering explicit instruction in rhetorical fallacies. This will help cultivate careful readers who can see through headlines and spot where the media misleads.

The post A Case Study in Rhetorical Fallacy and Media Literacy appeared first on American Enterprise Institute – AEI.