I guess as far as the Wall Street Journal faux conspiracy rant goes, if it isn't funny, it isn't a joke, no matter how clumsily you disguise your message. Ultimately I think it's just a wimpy way of stepping around what you really want to say. Under the pretense of "humor," you can fire as many irresponsible accusations as you want without having to take responsibility for your message. But The Wall Street Journal should know where it stands: it's not fun or funny -- in this case it's passive aggressive and that's always lame.
As for the bias argument, I guess I'll do a 180 and bite. Everybody knows Teresea Heinz Kerry told some "reporter" to "shove it". The media has had a field day with that, but what the media don't tell you is that the "shovee" works for a conservative billionaire who operates smear campaigns against liberals; the man actually has a vendetta against Mrs. Kerry. But that doesn't
make the news, even though that's more of a story.
Then there's the issue commonly illustrated that John Kerry is a big-shot Massachusettes billionaire married to another east-coast billionaire. The media paint a distorted picture of the "liberal elite" being some snooty country club estate reminiscent of a Twisted Sister video. At the same time, Bush is portayed as a cowboy, never mind the fact he's the son of a filthy rich oil baron. We don't hear much about that, because the media like to focus on personalities as opposed to issues.
When was the last time the mainstream media reported on Bush's environmental catastrophes? They don't cover it, but that doesn't mean terrible things aren't happening -- look at Weyerhauser's latest profit earnings and tell me they aren't grateful for productive lobbying.
You see bias works both ways -- the conservatives just whine more.
Krugman did a good piece on it this morning...
Respond to this posting
Back to top