Viewpoint-driven

Viewpoint-driven describes a process, narrative, argument, or decision that is primarily or significantly influenced by a particular perspective, belief system, or ideological stance. It emphasizes the importance of the individual's or group's perspective in shaping the final outcome, often at the expense of objectivity or alternative viewpoints. This can manifest in selecting information, framing arguments, or prioritizing certain values over others, which impacts decisions, outcomes, and overall interpretation of information. The term can carry neutral to negative connotations depending on context, implying either focused analysis from a specific perspective or bias in the narrative. A viewpoint-driven approach can be contrasted with more comprehensive and objective assessments, but is unavoidable given the influence of human subjectivity.

Viewpoint-driven meaning with examples

• The news outlet's reporting was criticized as viewpoint-driven, consistently highlighting issues that supported the publication's political stance while downplaying counterarguments. This created an echo chamber for their readers. Their coverage, arguably, focused more on reinforcing pre-existing beliefs than on delivering a balanced and fair report.
• The project's success heavily relied on viewpoint-driven design decisions that prioritized usability for the target demographic. Through this strategy, the design team could cater to their needs and preferences efficiently. This, although successful, unfortunately, rendered the final product relatively less accessible for users outside the target audience.
• Historians argued the interpretation of events was viewpoint-driven, based on the surviving sources and the historian's own historical understanding. As a result, multiple narratives coexisted. Considering the sources used, the historian's background, and their interpretation of available evidence, multiple perspectives were inevitable and valid.
• The research was found to be viewpoint-driven, incorporating only data that supported the researchers' predetermined hypothesis, which skewed its conclusions. This biased approach made the study unreliable. Other data should have been included, creating a much more comprehensive and reliable result.
• During the negotiations, the stakeholders' proposals were heavily viewpoint-driven, resulting in conflicts over differing values and priorities. The divergence in opinion made consensus challenging. Understanding the background of each proposal could, however, lead to a more productive negotiation process.