matter how devoted you are to your local fishwrap, the down and
dirty fact is that it can't be trusted to deliver unbiased, objective
news to your doorstep. With some notable exceptions that I'll cite,
shortly, every item in your paper contains spin.
Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the country.
New York Times is read by people who think they run the country.
Washington Post is read by people who think they ought to
run the country.
USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the
country but don't understand the Washington Post.
Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running
the country, if they could spare the time.
Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run the
New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure
who's running the country.
8.The New York Post is read by people who don't care
who's running the country, as long as they do something scandalous.
San Francisco Chronicle is read by people who aren't sure
there is a country, or that anyone is running it.
Miami Herald is read by people who are running another country.
take my word for it, check your favorite fishwrap for these warning
each headline match the body of the news story to which it's attached?
the headline match those facts you obtained elsewhere?
both sides of each hot-button issue equally represented? The most
likely abuses occur when the subject is one of the following: abortion;
minimum wage; gun control; affirmative action; so-called 'hate crimes';
global warming; secondhand smoke and its alleged dangers.
your hard news - your fishwrap's front section - populated by known,
lefty-in-the-extreme sources such as: New York Times; Hell-A Times;
Associated Press; Washington Post instead of locally-perpetrated
the stories and headlines selected for your fishwrap's front page
mirror the editorial positions espoused in the fishwrap's commentary
section? My local fishwrap is - editorially - a self-described 'libertarian'
newspaper. For example, they were steadfastly against Gulf War II,
so I wasn't shocked when all their primary war coverage came from
that bastion of alleged objectivity, the New York Times, a fishwrap
so over the top anti-war, anti-U.S., anti-Bush that even some notable
lefties complained about it.
your fishwrap diversity bonkers? Hiring talented scribblers who
happen to be ethnic is not what I mean. But, when they hire a properly-hyphenated
scribbler whose sole task is writing about their assigned group,
that's no shit diversity bonkers. My fishwrap features a beyond-annoying,
Amexican wench who is so out there that this no shit Amerikan citizen
trekked down to Mexico so she could become an official, Mexican
citizen, too. Her writings are a tribute to Colonista angst, so
much so that she even advocates forcing all Amerikan's to learn
Does your fishwrap get anything right...can be trusted to be objective
on any topic? The answer is yes, when it comes to the following
stock market averages and closing stock values.
sports results and today's scheduled games.
television listings. (Note: any inaccuracy here isn't spin, it's
meeting announcements: time, place, group's name. Wedding, anniversary,
and engagement announcements.
else is suspect. It must be examined critically for overt or stealth
spin doctoring. When you read a news item, always keep the warning
signs uppermost in your mind. If you have Internet access, compare
the news item to other news sources. If the subject is important
to you, do your own research. Whatever you do, don't let your local
fishwrap spin you. This process is called thinking and it's one
of those 'don't read your fishwrap without it' things.