MaxedOutMama
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
OxBlog's Adesnik vs. WaPo
I like OxBlog, because it is thoughtful. Adesnik is also a strong supporter of gay rights. I find it interesting that he too feels it necessary to point out the blatant bias and distorting effect of WaPo's reporting in the case of the Montgomery County Public School's new sex ed curriculum. I recommend reading his whole post, but here's a few quotes:
Adesnik also follows up with another post about journalism which I highly recommend. He closes with this:
Wow. Talk about fair and balanced. I'm adamantly pro-gay rights, but should public school teachers be taking an official position on what is or isn't a sin? Will we promote understanding by teaching children that those who oppose gay rights are just as bad as racists? ...and he closes with:
That's a pretty vague way to desribe a sex-ed curriculum with a clear-cut theological agenda.
Yeah, no wonder. That kind of preaching in the schoolroom is offensive enough that it might even belong on the front page.What is most disturbing to me about the curriculum is that it is blatantly unconstitutional and essentially abandons the entire concept of a secular schools. Where will we be in our multi-cultural society if we allow this sort of thing? Does no one at the Washington Post care about Muslim kids? Agnostic kids?
Adesnik also follows up with another post about journalism which I highly recommend. He closes with this:
...let me remind you of an observation made by Mike Allen, one of the Post's top political correspondents. Allen told an audience at a public discussion of the US media that:There is a place for advocacy journalism, but it would be better if it did not masquerade as neutral reporting. This is the reason people are relying less upon print journalism - all too often it is uninformative about the underlying issues. Whatever happened to the news? It's not news with views to which I object, it is views masquerading as news.
News writers are trying to present both sides' points-of-view, hence the "he said, she said" quality to [their work], but that they're trying to present these points-of-view in such a way so that a discerning reader can tell who's right based on reading the story. [NB: This is a paraphrase, not a direct quote, provided by one of Allen's fellow panelists.]
I certainly have enough confidence in the WaPo to believe that its correspondents are fully capable of filling their work with interpretive hints, even when they are under deadline pressue. I just wish they would be a little more forthright about their opinions.
