| |
|
Monday, August 26, 2002
|
|
WSJ.com on Ann Coulter
It really takes an amazing piece of journalism to make me stand up for Ann Coulter, and WSJ.com has produced it. I think she is a scary, sick wacko and it terrifies me that she is a best-selling author, but I can't deny that she has lots of fans. WSJ.com tries to justify her most outrageous remarks by saying they are all "political theater, a tongue-in-cheek agitprop, and believes that most Americans understand the difference." At first, I thought this implied that Coulter is a modern day Swift proposing the modern equivalent of "A Simple Proposition". However, Coulter's outrageous remarks are an extension of her serious remarks. It is easy to think she wishes "real harm to the New York Times" when she concludes an attack on the NY Times for their coverage of Dale Earnhardt’s death with liberals are “savagely cruel bigots who hate America and lie for sport.” No, I think WSJ.com is saying that you can't take Coulter's outrageous comments seriously because she is a woman. "For much milder remarks than she daily defiantly serves up, we've seen veteran broadcasters hounded out of their careers", however her "long-limbed signature silhouette" and "riverine blonde locks riffled by the breeze" apparently keep the WSJ.com from taking Coulter's remarks seriously. The whole opening paragraph oozed condescension towards women that apparently extends to Coulter. Coulter is a major conservative figure and for the WSJ to treat her as little better than a blonde bimbo is shocking.
10:22:29 PM 
|
|
Examples of bad journalism in the Dallas Morning News
In Sunday's A section, there was a blantantly biased story on protests that occurred during Bush's West Coast trip (sorry, can't find a link). The article is filled with White House spin and has only one one-sentence quote from a protest organizer. Here is some paragraphs from the body of the article:
"Peaceful protests are a wonderful part of American tradition, " Mr. Fleischer said. "Those who engage in violence regrettably represent a fringe, and that's how they're viewed." As for the nasty signs in Los Angeles, Mr. Fleischer said "Some of the fringe groups engage in extraordinary language...It's not tasteful, but it's their right." Other aides pointed out that many of the protests feature self-described anarchists. Other demonstrators, they said, are simply liberals who dislike Mr. Bush because he is a former businessman - an oil man - and a Republican.
The article has a picture with it of protesters. The picture is focused on a young man with a nose ring who is doing nothing particular, and the normal-looking people behind him are out-of-focus. Clear message - the protests were done by violent, nasty members of the fringes of society.
7:47:48 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2002 Unrelated Disney.
Last update: 9/1/2002; 9:33:24 AM.
|
|
|
