We live in a paradoxical age whose mixed messages seem to only magnify with each passing day. An article on CNN.com addresses a national poll about current First Lady, Melania Trump. The article, “CNN/ORC Poll: Melania Trump’s approval ratings are way up” is nothing new. A review of the article shows approval ratings of the last four first ladies, which means there have probably been other full articles evaluating the popularity of Hillary Clinton, Laura Bush and Michelle Obama. What is new is the hubbub of messages of individuality that strike a stark contrast to the news.

The Cable News Network has been around since 1980. Known for news and opinion, CNN has been a thorn in the side of the current president. While the media’s biases are known and have become laughable in many regards, the fact remains that a story will be published or run simply for attention. It may or may not be true, it may or may not be contrasted with another “news” article on the same webpage. It may not fit the leanings blatantly shown in other articles/stories.

So why does this matter? A news organization showing multiple sides of a story…that’s a good thing, right? Fair and balanced? Real news or fake news?

Here’s why it matters. The Opinion Research Corporation (ORC) is a demographic, health and market research company that works with CNN to scour the United States for public opinion. Their website says, “When you can see the truth, you can transform your future.” While a public poll is truth for some, it is not truth for others. The very definition of truth has been redefined so many times, often to suit the person speaking.

The CNN article states: “The more Americans learn about first lady Melania Trump, the more they like her.” As of March 10, her approval rating went up 16 points to 52% overall since before the inauguration. Specifically: “In February 2016, the former model’s favorable rating was a paltry 24%, her unfavorable was 31% and 23% had never even heard of her. Now, just 3% say they don’t know who the first lady is, and her unfavorable rate has held steady at 32%.”

Can you imagine reading a poll about your approval rating? Especially for a role you did not ask for? So many of us try to put ourselves in family scenarios and jobs and attempt to please our families and our bosses. Can you imagine reading that your favorable rating was “paltry” or that your unfavorable rate is holding steady – at any number? Who wants an unfavorable rate and what does that do to your self-esteem?

Contrast this evaluation with recent media coverage of women protesting. Contrast it with messages of “Just be yourself,” “You are enough” and “Don’t worry about what others say.” We easily throw around platitudes and memes, so why don’t we draw the line of hypocrisy when a fellow female is evaluated and degraded by men and women alike?

Why is it important for the reader to know someone was a former model? Is that a laser-focused way to invoke societal prejudices and preconceived ideas? The fact that we judge or “like” people without knowing them makes their lead sentence: “The more Americans learn about first lady Melania Trump, the more they like her” a sad reminder that the simple rules of friendship continue to erode. This article is only one example of so many that have been published over many years. While this is not a new issue, in this time of trying to elevate the status of every woman maybe we can push back against some of the negativity. Maybe we can rip apart the paradox and take time to see people for who they really are.