Suicidal Snowflakes

Just because I have a short attention span doesn\’t mean I…

HATE “journalism.”

“Fair and impartial” media my ass. I am not passing judgment on what the pope said. In fact, if you read these articles… you don’t even know WHAT the hell the pope said. I’m passing judgment on the way these stories are written. I think it would be more informative and put the story into context more if you had more than two words out of the pope’s speach. Ever read a tagline review for a movie? “Exciting…exhilarating ” says Some News Agency. Meanwhile the sentence that’s extracted from says “There was nothing even exciting about this movie. I’ve taken craps in public restrooms that were more exhilarating.” But hey, those words’re in there. It’s a quote.,2933,213930,00.html

ws if the pope (hating on Christianity’s both easy and fun) bashes Islam, a peace-loving religion, and in turn gets denounced by Pakistan’s legislature (quaking in my boots, guys), than if the pope makes a pretty decent statement regarding fundamentalists terrorst tenants that happen to include two tetchy words that make “open-minded” people (basically those that sympathise with any popular cause. Christianity–not pop-culture friendly–they get to be the bad guys, regardless of whether they actually are, in this instance, or not)…cringe.

At least this netscape article includes what the pope actually SAID, in something resembling context and said the pope neither agreed nor disagreed with the thing he was quoting, other than saying it was “brusque.”

A few points I’d like to make:

1) I do have an opinion regarding the pope’s comments.  I will not discuss it here.  I would like to make it ABUNDANTLY clear that this post is NOT about islam, christianity, the pope, the war, etc.

2) This is about the media and how much I despise their sensationalization of everything.  I think it’s fine to show the world’s reaction to something the pope says.  Especially if some people’re ticked off (aww come on, lets face it–the pope could say the sky is blue, and that’d piss someone off somewhere–any sort of leadership role brings that with it).  However, especially in the first story, they’re focusing on the reaction, at the expense of reporting what people are reacting to.  I mean, I am, in general, a pretty apathetical person, and that first artical would have had ME up in arms too, if I didn’t reserve 92.3% of my loathing for the media, especially the local media in my town.

3) I believe that the obsession with sensationalizing any sort of “news” and crafting a story in a way that tells certain truths but dispenses with  others that could be concieved as contextual truths because selective truth tells a better story is neglegant.  Remember the Maine, much? Not a new game of the media, so don’t act like I’m bashing the media because they have a bias against christianity, cat lovers and fat people. It’s almost to the point where some of these stories, and the way they’re “selective” in their fact-reporting, are “creative non-fiction.” They tell a story with a good side and a bad side, a dramatic  beginning, middle and end, and leave you emotionally charge.

4) Take a look at that second story.  Can someone tell me if we hate the jews or not? I mean, half the time it’s like… oh america hates jews! and the other half people’re like… you zionists! You jew lovers! I mean… I just want to be clear.  Do I hate or love jews? Cuz… personally…I believe in hating people on an individual basis as opposed to association with any sort of group human beings insist on lumping themselves into all the time.  Give any human being long enough–they’ll give you a reason to hate ’em.  Usually it only takes me like…7.8 minutes before I have a totally unique (like a snowflake!), personalized and individual reason to hate someone.

But back to the jew thing. It’s like when I hear people from hollywood bitching that hollywood is homophobic and jew-phobic.  Uh… isn’t that like, self-hate or something, considering that’s like 82.8% of hollywood. It leaves me… confused.

5) I’d be quite happy (But i’m not holding my breath), if the media would get off the intellectual elitist pedistal they’ve placed themselves upon and just report the facts, and not try to shape a story by selective fact-telling.  Sure, I know selection is inevidable and that it’s impossible to be entirely impartial, but don’t be such big honkin’ drama queens.  I mean… really.

6) The intellectual arrogance when they put their little moral slants on everything. I see this as more of an affront to intellectual honesty than some sort of moral code that I disagree with–this thing where they don’t acknowledge any sort of view point or morality beyond their own, and anyone who believes different is obviously backwards and wrong.  I am NOT getting into, on here, one way or another, my feelings regarding exactly what their moral code entails.  Another story for another day.


September 15, 2006 - Posted by | Social and Politics, Unwashed Masses

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: