Stupid media issues
There are times when the media just shows it's colors, and you can't help but just feel the whiplash hitting you. Recently, Ann Coulter was at a conference and she made a statement where she wished that Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens would be off the Court. Preferably by poison (http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060127121209990005&ncid=NWS00010000000001). There's only one problem:
She was joking. What she said, EVEN in the article, was "We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said. "That's just a joke, for you in the media."
But the liberal media (in this case, the AP) can't be bothered to separate their loyalties to the left from actually telling a news story, or in this case, a NON-news story. It's in essence, a hit piece on Coulter, which is nothing new. I may disagree with her on topics, but in this case, she's not doing anything. Her position was that she wants more conservative justices on the SCOTUS in order to overturn Roe V. Wade. And that the best way to do that is to get rid of the more liberal justices from the court. She's a constitutional lawyer, folks. She knows how the court's run- and that there will probably always be a mix of liberals and conservatives on the court. And she even said she was joking- and pointed out to the media that was what she was doing.
Knowing full well they'd run screaming off to the presses with her comments. And to top it off, the article's nothing but a "I really don't like Coulter, and SEE, SEE! Conservatives are EVIL!"type of piece. Why? This is how the article ends:
Coulter has made a career of writing and lecturing on her strongly conservative views.
At one point during her address, which was part of a lecture series, some audience members booed when she cut off two questioners. "I'm not going to be lectured to," Coulter told one man in a raised voice.
She drew more boos when she said the crack cocaine problem "has pretty much gone away."
Now, if the article was to be just about her views on SCOTUS and her remarks, that's fine. But to add this in tells me that the writer had NO intentions of portraying Coulter in a fair light. She wants the reader to join in the boos of the audience. She wants the readers to side with her on the crack cocaine issue. The writer- who, by the way, remains anonymous (conveinient, eh?)- The last two paragraphs have no standing as to the actual article's focus, and are just there to make sure that the reader gets their viewpoint about how evil conservatives are- and that a majority of people disagree with them (in this case, a clearly partisan audience). It's a bait and switch- making the reader feel as though more people disagree with her than really do.
Oh, and the article's link? It's "Coulter Wants a Justice Gone: See her Poisonous Remark"
And I don't think the AP was joking. It's no small wonder why people are tired of the mainstream media.
She was joking. What she said, EVEN in the article, was "We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said. "That's just a joke, for you in the media."
But the liberal media (in this case, the AP) can't be bothered to separate their loyalties to the left from actually telling a news story, or in this case, a NON-news story. It's in essence, a hit piece on Coulter, which is nothing new. I may disagree with her on topics, but in this case, she's not doing anything. Her position was that she wants more conservative justices on the SCOTUS in order to overturn Roe V. Wade. And that the best way to do that is to get rid of the more liberal justices from the court. She's a constitutional lawyer, folks. She knows how the court's run- and that there will probably always be a mix of liberals and conservatives on the court. And she even said she was joking- and pointed out to the media that was what she was doing.
Knowing full well they'd run screaming off to the presses with her comments. And to top it off, the article's nothing but a "I really don't like Coulter, and SEE, SEE! Conservatives are EVIL!"type of piece. Why? This is how the article ends:
Coulter has made a career of writing and lecturing on her strongly conservative views.
At one point during her address, which was part of a lecture series, some audience members booed when she cut off two questioners. "I'm not going to be lectured to," Coulter told one man in a raised voice.
She drew more boos when she said the crack cocaine problem "has pretty much gone away."
Now, if the article was to be just about her views on SCOTUS and her remarks, that's fine. But to add this in tells me that the writer had NO intentions of portraying Coulter in a fair light. She wants the reader to join in the boos of the audience. She wants the readers to side with her on the crack cocaine issue. The writer- who, by the way, remains anonymous (conveinient, eh?)- The last two paragraphs have no standing as to the actual article's focus, and are just there to make sure that the reader gets their viewpoint about how evil conservatives are- and that a majority of people disagree with them (in this case, a clearly partisan audience). It's a bait and switch- making the reader feel as though more people disagree with her than really do.
Oh, and the article's link? It's "Coulter Wants a Justice Gone: See her Poisonous Remark"
And I don't think the AP was joking. It's no small wonder why people are tired of the mainstream media.
posted by Fafhrd1 | 1:14 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home