how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
152 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
 Noah VailSon made my AvatarPremium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:1
 ·Bright House
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
| Condition'd for Suspicion
Hmmmm. |
.
It's been 20 years since I first understood the lengths the press will go through, to form public opinion via the news. That has me evaluating, every facet of content delivery, to see if there is a larger goal in story choice and layout.
Sometimes I see clear agenda, othertimes I can rule it out; most often there isn't enough evidence to say anything.
In my opinion, Matt Drudge has always scrutinized the grouping of his stories. Sometimes I see agenda, sometimes they're ordered just because of similarities.
Tonight's story grouping bothered me, no matter the reason.
I object to a story, about the PotUS's children,
directly adjacent to a story
about a murdered child; in an upscale environment.
No matter the intent, I still see association. Consideration and tact should have had a couple of bylines padding between the two stories.
To take a step back, I believe anything other than a full news blackout of every President's (under 21yo) children, is inappropriate. I don't care if his 12yo wins the No-Bull-Please-Prize. Positive stuff can be novelized after office.
No sitting president should ever have his/her minor children in the news, even if they desire it. The children sacrifice enough, we shouldn't taint what little they retain of their parents during the 4/8 years.
I like Matt Drudge and I openly support (much of) his agenda. However, I strongly feel he should have handled this choice differently.
NV
--
In my perfect religion, a giant hole appears and sucks up all the lousy people.
I call it the Crapture. | |
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| I tend to agree with you on the children should be off limits, not that they ever have been, but that is another topic. To follow up on what you said, yes, off limits, but when one of the parents decides to use them for pushing their pet project, then they (the parents/president/first lady) have no room to talk, or b*tch about media coverage of their children, since the parents opened the door.
In short, both sides need to leave the children out of the media. | |
1 edit | said by Austinloop:I tend to agree with you on the children should be off limits, not that they ever have been, but that is another topic. To follow up on what you said, yes, off limits, but when one of the parents decides to use them for pushing their pet project, then they (the parents/president/first lady) have no room to talk, or b*tch about media coverage of their children, since the parents opened the door. In short, both sides need to leave the children out of the media. The problem is that the Politicians want to use their children when it is convenient for them and furthers their careers. But when something negative crops up they scream & whine about how it hurts the children if covered. I agree kids should be hands off, but it never will be as long as the pols continue to use their own kids. | | |
|
|
