Are There Any Comical Editors With Any Sense?
The Comical's editorial (mis)judgment can, at times, just boggle the mind.
The latest, maybe greatest, example is this "Viewpoints" piece by Kathryn Prymmer with the following headline:
Face to angry face with personal politics of fear: Kerry sticker sets off driver, emboldening voter
Miss Prymmer claims to have had a bad experience with a vocal anti-Kerry driver who was rude to her in a parking lot, and recounts the incident in great detail:
I WAS recently out doing a bit of shopping at a local department store on a bright, hot Saturday afternoon in northwest Houston. I had unloaded my purchases into my car and was starting to return the shopping cart to the cart holding stand, when a man and his wife passed me and started unloading their cart into a truck one parking spot over from my vehicle. As I returned to my car, I saw that the man had placed his empty cart directly in back of my car.
I looked over at them and spread my arms, hands up in question.
The man, who was driving, rolled down the electric window on the passenger side and yelled out, "That's because you have a f#@%ing Kerry sticker on your car!" Then he peeled out of the parking space and raced away.
I have my doubts that it even happened, although that's just my opinion.
Still, all we can go on is opinion, because this tale is uncorroborated, and most likely unverifiable.
But by printing this letter, the Comical actually endorses that it DID happen, and not only that, but it's LIKELY to happen.
Even worse, they implicitly endorse the woman's conclusion at the end of her story that it was a Bush supporter at fault:
So, Mr. Hateful Bush Supporter, I just want you and all of your friends to know that, like the thousands of women before me, who courageously gave so much of themselves so that I could have the right and privilege to vote...."
How does she know this (possibly fictional) character was a Bush supporter? Her account doesn't mention him saying anything in support of Bush or mention anything on his car to indicate that. Why couldn't he be an angry Nader supporter who thinks Kerry's a sellout? Or an angry Dean supporter who thinks his guy got shafted?
It's an unverifiable assumption (and logical leap) to decide a Bush supporter was the "perpetrator" of this uncorroborated incident.
What that tells me is that this uncorroborated and most likely unverifiable story resonated with the views of the Comical's editors about how Bush supporters might act. So they printed this piece.
The thing is, we don't have major problems in this community with Bush supporters going around and terrorizing those who support other candidates. And in Houston proper, the city actually went for Gore last time and may well go for Kerry this time. It's fairly balanced in its political outlook anyway.
I've always refrained from putting political stickers on my car with one exception (Orlando Sanchez's first run for mayor), not because I believe all Democrats are bad people and likely to do mean things, but because there are nutjobs all over the political spectrum who might key a car with a sticker they don't like if they were drunk or angry, and I love my Jeep more than I love any of the silly b@stards pursuing careers in politics.
If what Miss Prymmer says is true, then it's unfortunate. But it's not behavior representative of most Houstonians, whatever their party. That the Comical implies that it is -- and that it was the work of a Bush supporter -- is another example of irresponsible journalism.
In my view, this piece never should have been printed absent corroboration. Even then, it would be an iffy call for editors who have any sense.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 07/31/04 12:51 | Houston | Technorati
Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry
TrackBack
There are currently no trackbacks for this item.
Incoming trackback pings have been disabled because of abusive spammers. Technorati is now used to track cross-blog conversation.
Comments
John and my cars have been wearing Bush Cheney stickers for five years now. I've had people lean on their horns and glare but no one has keyed us yet. In fact, last week I got picked up by a Montrose Republican :)
BTW, I love the ad for Custom Stickers up there. Think I'll get in on the Google IPO and buy five shares.
Posted by Cathy @ 10:05 on 08/02/04
I just thought I'd ad my comments to the "Comical" comments by "Kevin". Obviously, Kevin is unfamiliar with the Chronicle’s word-count standards on Editorial items. As there was a word-count, I could, of course only put in a limited number of words or explainations.
This was an editorial, an Op Ed piece - so, of course, it is an expressed opinion. The event did happen as I told it. I assumed that the person verbally attacking me was a Bush supporter because there was a Bush sticker on his truck. Hardly an "irresponsible" assumption. While Kevin is, of course, entitled to his opinion - his cynical assertions that this incident probably didn't even happen are unfortunate, but understandable. Rest easy gentlemen, of course, it didn't happen. Just as we know that women are never beaten or abused by their husbands; children are never abused by their parents or other adults... God forbid anyone should even entertain the idea. Who would dare believe a women or child who would even say such terrible things? After all, it's just a 'fabrication' that can't be corroborated.
Sadly, there are those of us who know that such things can and do happen in our society. We also see stories every day on the news about enraged people acting irrationally over inconsequential things - such as a bumper sticker. It's easy to write off the opinions, the experiences, the feelings of others - especially if we have not had to face some of the uglier things in life ourselves; the silent tragedies that can - and do - happen all around us every day. I never said, nor implied, that all Bush supporters acted in such a manner as this man. And I don't think the Chronicle did either - though I will say that I was a bit 'shocked' at the size and heading given to the piece. I only told of an incident that happened to me. One incident, that happened on a certain day in my life. It doesn't make it untrue - any more that saying that all homeless people are lazy or insane would be a true statement. But, I can assure Kevin that I heard dozens of stories from others in the Houston area, and throughout the nation, who had much worse things happen to them or their property for having Kerry signs or stickers on their cars or homes. Sure, Kevin - maybe we deserve it for having 'shown our stripes' - but my hopes for our country are ones of tolerance, dialog, interchange of ideas and values, understanding - not derision, hatred, violence, and intolerance. I wrote the piece because what happened scared me, and then it made me angry - angry to be caused to fear for having expressed my opinion in a land that is supposed to stand for freedom. I do not believe that terror, abuse or intimidation should be used to try to enforce opinions or beliefs on another. That is what happened to me, and that is why I wrote the piece. I'm sorry if it offended you that it was a Bush supporter and that CNN wasn't there to corroborate the incident. But, it makes the experience no less real.
Kathryn
Posted by Kathryn @ 09:25 on 10/10/05
Thanks for writing.
You do seem to have missed the broader point of the post, which is that by publishing unverifiable hearsay, the Chronicle editors were effectively endorsing a view that such incidents do happen and are likely to happen in Houston, courtesy of one party. Nothing on the Chronicle news pages bore out that assertion.
The Chronicle editorial board leans far to the left, so that's not surprising. But, it's not balance, and the account really wasn't something responsible editors of a major newspaper should run. It's more appropriate for a community newspaper gossip column or a blog.
Sure, Kevin - maybe we deserve it for having 'shown our stripes'
NOTHING in that post suggests I think that, and to suggest otherwise is to demonstrate that one's paranoia might just get the best of a an otherwise well meaning person.
A responsible major daily should have refrained from reprinting unverifiable hearsay. But, of course, it was unverifiable hearsay that resonated with the worldview of the editors.
Posted by Kevin @ 09:40 on 10/10/05
Every major newspaper carries editorials. Every newspaper - major, or provicial - will show 'bias', even if they do not carry editorials. There is 'bias' in the very placement or choice of the news stories enlisted - of the thousands available on any given day. Of course the Chronicle shows bias, as does every single news organization, in some form or another - by the very choices that they make in how, or even whether, they report a certain item.
If that was truly your point - then perhaps you should have just stated it, rather than stating that my report was probably false, and therefore the Chronicle editors in error.
I have read Op Ed pieces in the Chronicle that were very unflattering to the Democratic party. I have no idea what the 'count' would be as far an even-handedness, as I will confess, I do not read the Chronicle editorials everyday. But, your point is valid, and correct - the Chronicle is just as biased, or unbiased, as any, and every, other newspaper in the country.
Posted by Kathryn @ 10:09 on 10/10/05
Thanks for conceding my point. The Chronicle editors claim to be neither liberal nor conservative. It's an inaccurate claim.
Honestly, I do have some questions about your account, but readers can certainly make up their minds whether they think it's credible. That's really beside the point, however. The real point remains, as stated in the post: Because there is no way of knowing and you've provided NO CORROBORATION, nobody can know. A reputable major newspaper should not have printed unverifiable hearsay.
The Chronicle editors likely printed it because it confirmed their worldview. That's not surprising, but it's not what I expect from a quality newspaper.
Posted by Kevin @ 10:18 on 10/10/05
If "quality newpapers" only print items that are totally without bias, and no bias should be used in the placement or detail of any and all entailed items - then, it stands to reason that, there are no "quality newspapers".
Viewpoints and Op Eds are newspaper forums for just that - viewpoints and opinions. While some may be able to point to direct correlation or theory to try to assert credence to their view - it is, still, an opinion. I think that most readers are aware that the opinions printed in the Chronicle, as with all other major papers, are just what they are purported to be - opinions, and are not held to the same standard of "news info. varification" that a lead story would be.
While I quite understand your assertion concerning the 'validity' or 'verification' of an Op Ed piece - you, also, seem to be missing the whole point - that they are Op Ed pieces.
Therefore, your "point" concerning the Chronicle Editors, should apply to each and every Op Ed article ever printed - not just to the piece I wrote. And, given your conditions of "quality" - there are no newspapers on this planet that conform to your specifications. Any newspaper that you could consider "a quality paper" would, alas, be a quite biased opinion on your part... Wouldn't it?
Posted by Kathryn @ 10:54 on 10/10/05
Your unverifiable assertions are about facts. No, editorial pages shouldn't reprint unverifiable facts.
You are confusing opinion about establishing facts with established facts themselves.
Your facts were unsubstantiated, and amounted to hearsay. They didn't belong in a major, quality newspaper as a standalone piece, no, even on the opinion pages.
Posted by Kevin @ 10:59 on 10/10/05
Add Comments
While it is not required, creating an account for commenting provides a number of benefits (such as comment editing and bypassing the captcha challenge). You may log in to your account here.
No flames or impolite behavior. Any questions, see the site policies. Older posts are moderated (because of spammers), so if your post does not appear immediately, that could be why.
HTML will be stripped. URLs will be transformed into hyperlinks.
[b]text[/b] will produce bold text. [i]text[/i] will produce italicized text.
Comments for this post must be approved before being published. Thank you!
BLOG
» Create Account
» Log In
DISCLAIMER
Content and design copyright © 1997-2008, Kevin Whited.
Posts represent the views of Kevin Whited (and occasional guest bloggers) only, and do not necessarily reflect the views of employers, family, friends, or significant others.