Friday, March 09, 2007

Leftist Hypocrisy Re Ann Coulter --- And The MSM's Deafening Silence

SEE UPDATES AT END.

====================================================

As noted
here, I came out immediately and vehemently against Ann Coulter's use of the word "faggot" to describe John Edwards at the recent CPAC conference --- and I maintain that stance 100%.

Furthermore, I assigned a substantial portion of the blame for the long-term damage that will befall conservatives to the CPAC executive(s) who invited her to speak there, and to the audience who applauded her incalculably stupid statement, either begrudgingly or enthusiastically. I will be proven right. In fact, I already am.

TODAY, however,
CNSNews uber-sleuth Patrick Goodenough has documented many of the innumerable times that leftists (whether standard-issue, or escapees from mental institutions) have used the word "faggot" --- including (a) the blogger who recently resigned from John Edwards's campaign (over his clear wish that she wouldn't), and (b) GLAAD's double-jointed double-standard on some who use the word, when one offender turned out to be a womanizing rap star who also happens to sing about females being "bitches," "ho's," etc.

This one I won't excerpt. Read it all
HERE.

Then think to yourself: Why the hell isn't the mainstream media putting Coulter's comment into context --- while not excusing it in any way --- by pointing out this glaring hypocrisy of those on the left who now have their collective panties in a bunch over how "hateful" and "bigoted" they claim that Coulter is, and by extension, conservatives are... while using the exact same hateful, bigoted epithet themselves, with reckless abandon?

The answer is glaringly obvious: The MSM would rather shield these groups and individuals, pretend that their use of the word "faggot" just doesn't matter, and that the general public --- who saw the MSM play, replay, and re-replay the Coulter clip hundreds of times in recent days --- has no right to expect them to use their vast resources to point this all out.

By extension, it is revelations such as those provided by Goodenough that give substance to the charge that the MSM is now, and has been for some time, essentially at war with reason, context, and accountability. And this abdication of responsibility, I would argue, also lies at the root of the fact that so many Americans have such little knowledge of world affairs, and that they are unable to put what little knowledge they do have into a rational context.

One indication as to the reason for this abdication was revealed in a USA Today article this week, More Reporters Embrace An Advocacy Role, that documented how "activist journalism" is taking over today's newsrooms --- newsrooms which, according to survey after survey, are overwhelmingly dominated by left-of-center reporters and editors. Excerpt:
The "social journalism" that made Oprah Winfrey an international fairy godmother is the new rage in network and cable news, and it's expanding to other media... (I)ncreasingly, journalists and talk-show hosts want to "own" a niche issue or problem, find ways to solve it and be associated with making this world a better place...

At NBC, Today news anchor Ann Curry has carved out a niche as a humanitarian reporter for her segments on starvation in Darfur, a region of the Sudan she has visited twice since March 2006. "Our job is to give voice to people who have no voice. I think we've forgotten that in recent years."
Oh, really, Ann? Funny, last time I looked up the definition of "journalist," that description wasn't in there. Here's how Merriam-Webster defines "journalism:"
(1)(a) the collection and editing of news for presentation through the media; (b) the public press; (c) an academic study concerned with the collection and editing of news or the management of a news medium

(2)(a) writing designed for publication in a newspaper or magazine; (b) writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation; (c) writing designed to appeal to current popular taste or public interest*
(*this definition is pure b-s, but I'll leave it alone)

What Curry (and USA Today) describes is actually "political (or social) activism." And if she and her fellow travelers want to "give voice" to certain segments of society, then let her, and them, label their work as such --- and stop disguising it as "news," or "journalism," particularly when such an incendiary topic as the use of the word "faggot" in public settings is concerned.

In this regard, the MSM deserves an "F" in "Journalism 101," for its failure (if not its willful abdication of its responsibility) to devote the bare minimum of resources to putting the whole Coulter-comment controversy into a reasonable context, instead of fueling and feeding the fire of demagoguery-laced hysteria that has surrounded her comments ever since.

============================

Update 1, March 16: Just received this via email --- an excellent statement by GayPatriot on the Coulter fiasco, here.

Original content is © Copyright 2007 by Jon Quixote. Email to jonquix@hotmail.com

.

3 comments:

darwinita said...

What you're railing about isn't really a right/left issue, it's a human nature issue. Consider:

In the classroom, we often participate in a program that involves putting a little pink triangle somewhere in the room, with a blurb under it discussing how that classroom is a "safe zone." That means if a kid calls something "gay, (the most common invocation )" then I pretty much bark at 'em about how "gay" should not be used as a perjorative, ect...

When I get home, however, or am among my friends (a fairly even mix of gay/ straight,) this falls away and I use it as flagrantly as my kids do in the classroom.

Enterainingly enough, I don't see this as hypocrisy. To wit:

It's a matter of appropriateness. In public, mixed company, it is appropriate to maintain tighter standards than one would in private. This also holds true with the word "nigger," which NYC is legislating into even more power as a word of evil than if they just ignored it.

As far as Ann Coulter is concerned, I find her stupidity about the creme brulee as horrifying as the Dick Cheney thread on Huffpoo. The stink raised by both sides is appropriate, but misguided. Who gives a shit about that stuff when we are watching our Bill of Rights being used as catbox liners?

I also dislike her on the basis that I bl'eeve she's from Darien- a cesspool of a town that I had the misfortune of living in for a summer, and where I witnessed more racism, prejudice, and discrimination than in inany other place in America I've ever been. Anyplace like that is also bound to produce something like the Adam's Apple.

Entertainingly enough, it has also produced more people who followed the Grateful Dead and Phish than any other town in America. hur hur hur

darwinita said...

Neoknot!

thanks for the shout on the last thread- good to hear from you. you guys BOTH know that if we didn't have Thalia we'd have had to invent her. *snicker* I saved my first few catfights with her on my blog- if you have 3 minutes to kill it''s good for a chuckle.

John- One more thing I thought of after I hit send:

Journalism.

Did you ever see the movie "Serenity?" GREAT SCI-FI. It's a movie based on Joss Whedon's seies "Firefly" which is also great sci-fi.... but to the point:

There's a character in "Serenity" called Mr Universe. He's a geek sitting in an uber-media center that gets the feeds from 30 worlds, he can hack into closed circuit feed, he can see everything. "You can't stop the signal, Mal," he says to the protagonist.

At one point, the Captain, Mal, is asking Mr Universe if there's anything on the news about his latest exploit.

Mr. Universe goes into a speil on how there's no news, just the signal, and that it is up to rational human beings to make their own minds up concerning the Universe based on their judgement of the various feeds making up the Cortex (their word for the media/ internet/ whatever).
"The News," he said (and here I paraphrase), "is just the Puppet Theater."

As a libertarian, I think it's pointless for you to rail against the stupididty of the MSM. You call some leftards, but they fall into the category of "fucktards," a group that encompasses both left and right.

It is the responsibility of the individual to elevate their way of thinking beyond leftard or righttard-
and out from under the umbrella of fucktardiness.

Thant being the case, I think you're aiming your ire at the wrong target- the MSM is just a natural result of fucktardiness developing because the signal is liken unto the Hydra- you cut off one head ( you @ Huffpoo 'frinstance) and up you pop again here (what new opportunities did you veiledly reference?).

So there, sailor boy. Whaddya think of THEM apples?

JonQuixote said...

.

Ah, Darwinita...

...I'm ashamed for ever having underestimated you. :)

Interesting analogy to the movie... which I haven't seen but will check out... but my central point stands (in this thread, as well as in the original Coulter thread):

That the MSM gets itself all wound up in fits of glee to police the right, to point out all their glaring hypocrisy in many areas (don't get me started on this...), and yet, who is there to police the left?

Well, according to the MSM, the left needs no policing... after all, they "mean well," whereas non-leftists are just... "mean."

You're absolutely right (er, "correct" ;) re there being f***tards on all sides of the political spectrum.

But the bottom line is that as survey after survey has revealed, the MSM has taken sides on almost every vital national debate: and it is to support leftist interpretations, values and objectives.

I'm just one of the few but growing number of folks who is exposing and confronting what they should be, if they were (ducks!) "fair and balanced."

The left, and particularly the HuffTards may despise FoxNewsChannel, but it is for this very reason that FNC is kicking the shit out of all their competitors, because they at least attempt to give both sides equal time - and equal exposure when they screw up.

So, one more thing for us to disagree about, I guess... but hey, I enjoy doing it civilly. And thanks again for the movie rec.

PS: Re your site, the Thaliar thread... I checked it out after bidding adieu to the HuffTards... and what should I see? References to the aspiring President of the Professional VictimCrats of America herself, Thaliar... sorry, couldn't quite finish it. :)

.