In recent years there has been a sharp increase in media sources explicitly telling me how to feel. And I’m not happy.

It’s a classic marketing technique to assert how you want someone to respond: “You’ll love how we do this”, “You’ll wonder how you did without this”, and so forth.

However, it’s now (a) more common, (b) more outrageous in its arrogance, and (c) more in my world.

Here are some technology examples from people and sites I otherwise really enjoy:

• TWiT network: “Netcasts you love, from people you trust.” (I regularly listen to TWiT and MacBreak Weekly and love the shows, but this opening salvo grates every time.)
• The Conversation: “A live talkshow hosted by your Internet pal, Dan Benjamin.” (Dan does really great podcasts, but he’s not my ‘pal’. Yet.)
• Mac Rumors: “Apple Mac Rumors and News You Care About.” (If you don’t mind, I’ll decide what I care about, so ditch the presumptions and stick to your good rumour sourcing.)

And then there’s the rise of the “and you should too” headline. Latest offender: Roger Ebert’s latest article in Newsweek, “Why I hate 3-D (and You Should Too)”. Ebert’s too good to pull this stunt.

Are readers and listeners presumed to be bereft of independent thought that they can’t make these judgements on their own? Is this trend being lamely shepherded in under the guise of a little ‘helping hand’ on how to respond in our media-saturated world? It’s disrespectful at best, insulting at worst.

So, how about it guys: let people draw their own conclusions, without resorting to cheap assertions which are arrogant and downright creepy.

I hate this tactic — and you should too.