Monday, September 26, 2005

ABC News: Even-Handed and Wrong

Tonight's e-mail blurb for ABC's "World News Tonight" previews the following story:

In other news, once again the separation between church and state is being hotly debated, as the American Civil Liberties Union accuses a Pennsylvania school board of inserting religion and creationism into their public schools. Jake Tapper brings us more about a case that will likely influence school boards across the country, where "intelligent design" and other theories that challenge evolution are gaining momentum.
ABC News thought it was playing fair, but actually played into the hands of un-American theists. How?

By putting the onus of the "accusation" on the ACLU. There is no question that the Pennsylvania school board is inserting religion, if not outright creationism, into public schools. The second error ABC makes is by labeling "intelligent design" a theory. It's not. It's the lack of a theory. It doesn't have the attributes of a scientific theory, nor does it have even a meaningful fraction of the support of the scientific community. So, why does ABC News treat it as a viable, let alone rival theory? Fear of the Christian right is one answer. Insecurity about their intellectual ability to distinguish between a real, accepted theory and a bogus, would-be theory is another. Fair-minded but wrong-headed loyalty to some sort of notion of post-modern objectivity -- under which every claim occupies equal grounds in the eyes of journalism -- is another. Unfortunately, this combination of cowardice, intellectual laxity and flawed concepts of objectivity will spell our doom until someone in the news media gets some courage, some brains and some heart.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

The person who writes this site is interesting, in a sad sort of way. He continually criticizes the Bush administration for its handling of the Hurricane Katrina tragedy. Does this guy think the New Orleans disaster would have been handled ANY better by the previous Clinton administration? Or, if Kerry had won, does he think the relief would have arrived significantly faster and saved the day? Get a clue. The problem was the lack of preparation in Louisiana. How about a clever thesaurus-infused article about their clownish mayor and governor? (Don't look for one soon - they're liberals, so they're safe from this guy's criticism.) Guess what...if Hurricane Katrina had hit 6 years ago, the exact same thing would have happened - dead poor people and a flooded New Orleans. And if Kerry had won? Dead poor people and a flooded New Orleans. Same exact thing. But hey, if death and tragedy provides this guy an opportunity to push his politics, go for it. Just know that we see right through it.

Anonymous said...

before an idea can become a theory it must be a postulate.
Just because you believe something is true doesn't make it so.
The trouble with right-wing morons is they can't/don't read, they only do as they are told.
Cool-ade drinkers. Sheeple.

Organized religion is the opiate of the people.

Anonymous said...

Hey anonymous! If hurricane Katrina had happened under Clinton.. or Kerry, response would have been much faster.

For one thing, they watch the news on TV, they dont wait for a handler to give them a DVD on friday night highlighting the weeks' top stories.

A-hole!

aimai said...

I think the funniest thing about the first anonymous is
a) can't figure out what the post is about and comments inappropriately and
b) accuses the blog writer of using "death and tragedy (to) push his politics" isn't that the very DEFINITION of what Bush and the PNACer's did after 9/11? Isn't that the definition of what the Wall Street JOurnal says are the plans afoot to use the death and t ragedy of new orleans to push pet republican political and economic theories while the population is too vulnerable to resist? Those aren't my interpretations--those are actually the opinions of both top Bush/cheney administrators and the Wall street journal (daily diary of the wingnut dream!)

aimai

Repair U.S. said...

"Theory" as used in science is not the "theory" used in philosophy. When will the idiots learn this 5th grade concept (see California State Education Code).

Anonymous said...

What's interesting, in a sad sort of way, is that the first poster has decided to bring the argument back to Katrina even though the post he is responding to has absolutely nothing to do with Katrina.

What's also interesting, in a sad sort of way, is that even the most conservative media outlets agree that BushCo is to blame for a large part (if not all) of the mess that was Katrina's aftermath. However, this guy is still clinging to the RNC talking points.

Anonymous said...

Theory" as used in science is not the "theory" used in philosophy. When will the idiots learn this 5th grade concept (see California State Education Code).
# posted by MyPOV : 9/27/2005 03:49:15 PM
----------------------------------
Are you saying that creationism is a philosophy?
My dictionary(RandomHouse websters)
says nothing about philosophy in the definition of theory.
However, the definition is vague in that sense.

Fade said...

The News would probably be better news if there were'nt RATINGS. It's pretty much impossible for them to put the onus on God-fearing types because they are one of the three major networks and a lot of christians dont have cable. If there were to- "God forbid" be truly unbiased, who knows how many of these religious types might be offended. There is less risk of them offending open minded liberals. So there ya go.

Jay Schiavone said...

What Anonymous said is not interesting, but in a sad sort of way. This site uses word verification to screen out manufactured responses, but you'd never know it from what Anonymous posted. As noted, it is not a response to the original post. How hackneyed to go after Clinton. Why not just blurt out, "Yeah, but Clinton got a blowjob!" As it happened Clinton paid special attention to FEMA (in no small part due to Bush '41's bungling of Hurricane Andrew recovery) and appointed a very qualified and experienced director James Lee Witt. Compare that to Bush's guy, Michael D. Brown who was on Capitol Hill today finger-pointing and playing the blame game. Would Kerrey have withheld funds for levee maintenance from the ACoE? We'll never know. But guess who did hold back those funds? Bush '43.
Your guy won, Anonymous and my guy lost so I guess I've got it coming. Blowjob! Blowjob! Blowjob! Well, shut my mouth.

As for mypov's equivocating: I guess that would depend on what your definition of the word theory is. If it's possible to append the word theory to something, it can't possibly be BS!

What happened to the old (always wrong) certitude of the Bush crowd? They're becoming a bunch of wishy-washy Democrats.

SatanicRob said...

Democracy is a religion.
The majority is supposed to rule, but when the majority wants something that would "hurt" the feelings of the other majority (Side of the minority) a back/forth fight of who is "the people" ensues "We the people", "NO, we the people". The congress always resolves the issue with "the meek shall inherit the earth" and chooses the minority side as the majority rule. This is how the bogus civil rights crap came to be.
It's all just a bunch of BS.

Anonymous said...

This sounds like typical ABC News. They have to inject their Republican spin hourly in small "updates" on ESPN Radio and they;re OK, if you like propoganda

Newer Post Older Post Home