This link has been bookmarked by 8 people . It was first bookmarked on 23 Jun 2009, by T. Rex Bean.
-
23 Jun 09
Matthew Elliot"So the President emphatically said it was torture. So did the Attorney General. But they issued "no overarching statement" on the issue? What does that even mean? What’s an "overarching statement"? More to the point, why do they need Obama to say it
politics media torture language journalism rhetoric MSM criticism bullshit Bush history Oabama McCain ethics Guantanamo Bagram Abu_Ghraib
-
Doug NoonAnyone who believes that NPR is a "liberal" media outlet -- and anyone who wants to understand the decay of American journalism -- should read this column by NPR's Ombudsman, Alicia C. Shepard, as she explains and justifies why NPR bars the use of the word "torture" to describe what the Bush administration did.
-
It doesn’t seem to occur to her that something other than base vindictiveness – such as a desire to maintain the universal taboo against torture, or allegiance to accuracy in language – might motivate those who want NPR to call torture "torture," rather than prettify it with banality-of-evil euphemisms invented by the very people who perpetrated it.
-
As is virtually always the case with modern journalists, those who scream the loudest about how they must refrain from stating facts in order to maintain "neutrality" are the ones who, in reality, are the least neutral of all. They're just too dishonest to acknowledge it.
-
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.