Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
No, I'm saying that, when one purports to deliver news, one should not sneak partisan cheerleading into the effort, no matter what side you're on.
My local paper keeps talking about the "discredited Swiftboaters". It speaks as if the subject has been closed. It simply does not quote any of the rather conclusive evidence the other way, and, in fact, walks very lightly around how Kerry has admitted that his Cambodia stories were "not quite accurate". It certainly never speaks of how the central points that Kerry was trying to make as he attempted to sway US policy depended on the very anecdotes that he now dismisses as mere details.
So, yes, dishonest.
Oh, by the way, over 700 arrests of protestors at this point, and what does the NYT have to say about it?
"Until now, the organized protests that have drawn hundreds of thousands of people have proceeded mostly without violence."
Tell me - which side does this misstatement serve?
|
Here's a local TV example -- one of our local political reporters at the Convention last night (a well known liberal) breathlessly at the end of his report "broke" a story that Michael Moore was being "thrown out" of the convention during Giuliani's speech and was "surrounded" by 20 or so Secret Service agents for no apparent reason. This morning we find out that Moore left on his own to go to another engagement and that venue security and his own escorted him out as a courtesy... don't hold your breath for a correction.
Also reports on the Air and Water Show here last week focused inordinately in the leads of their stories and headlines on the 100 or so peace protestors who complained the event promoted militarism -- as opposed to the 2 MILLION people who just watched the show and had no problem with it.
