Not whether coal and oil are clean, but how to smother them in green.
Not whether abortion is right or wrong but which policies are more effective in curbing the practice and providing pre- and post-natal care to mother and child.
Not whether abortion is right or wrong but which policies are more effective in curbing the practice and providing pre- and post-natal care to mother and child.
Not whether to cut 20th century military programs but how to follow up on the decision to curb the outrageously expensive fighter-jet program.
I could go on. Everywhere you turn, the debate has changed, no thanks to the media by and large.
Looking over the past decade, I must say media made a mess of public debate.
The delay in stem cell research is a perfect example. Even when reporting Obama’s initiative last month to permit more stem cell research, few in mainstream media took time to point out that most embryos get flushed in any event. This simple point should’ve been de rigueur when reporting on the issue.
Similarly, one of the truths I used to shout from the rooftop was contained in the name Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi. He was living proof that torture is not only cruel and ineffective, but is toxic to truth and policy debates. It was largely al-Libi’s lies (later recanted) that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell and others repeated again and again to justify our biggest foreign policy and spending mistake of all time--the Shock & Awe against Iraq. Al-Libi’s name should’ve been the end of any debate on torture. Every journalist should’ve felt compelled to report his story when the subjects of torture or justifications for the war came up, yet media seldom mentioned him.
Or take global warming. How often were we treated to "fair and balanced" debates on this subject that obscured the central truth that virtually every objective peer-reviewed study by scientists has concluded global warming is real and that humans increase it. This should've been addressed in every story.
And wouldn’t it have been worth asking George W. Bush, just once, whether he was helping to bring on the End Times and other so-called Biblical prophecies? It might’ve cost him a million votes no matter how he answered, and the question was not only fair but crucial to an understanding of his war-making ardor.
Think how much better off we’d all be today had journalists asked him this and other tough questions in 2000 or 2004.
Think how much shouting from rooftops the world would’ve been spared.
The rational and well-meaning no longer have to shout to be heard. Bask in it while it lasts.
The delay in stem cell research is a perfect example. Even when reporting Obama’s initiative last month to permit more stem cell research, few in mainstream media took time to point out that most embryos get flushed in any event. This simple point should’ve been de rigueur when reporting on the issue.
Similarly, one of the truths I used to shout from the rooftop was contained in the name Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi. He was living proof that torture is not only cruel and ineffective, but is toxic to truth and policy debates. It was largely al-Libi’s lies (later recanted) that George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell and others repeated again and again to justify our biggest foreign policy and spending mistake of all time--the Shock & Awe against Iraq. Al-Libi’s name should’ve been the end of any debate on torture. Every journalist should’ve felt compelled to report his story when the subjects of torture or justifications for the war came up, yet media seldom mentioned him.
Or take global warming. How often were we treated to "fair and balanced" debates on this subject that obscured the central truth that virtually every objective peer-reviewed study by scientists has concluded global warming is real and that humans increase it. This should've been addressed in every story.
And wouldn’t it have been worth asking George W. Bush, just once, whether he was helping to bring on the End Times and other so-called Biblical prophecies? It might’ve cost him a million votes no matter how he answered, and the question was not only fair but crucial to an understanding of his war-making ardor.
Think how much better off we’d all be today had journalists asked him this and other tough questions in 2000 or 2004.
Think how much shouting from rooftops the world would’ve been spared.
The rational and well-meaning no longer have to shout to be heard. Bask in it while it lasts.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
