Thursday, August 25, 2005

Atrios on the "equal time for different views" Doctrine

I don't know the specifics of Kurtz' comment, but Atrios does a nice job of destroying his "equal time for different views," doctrine.
It isn't clear what "the other side" is here, but goddamnit we will find that person. Luckily, that person won't actually have to bother going and sitting in the sun in Texas for weeks, just by virtue of Sheehan's existence that person, whoever it may be, will be given equal time, no matter how unequal they are.

The story is about a mother who lost a son in Iraq and went to Crawford to try to get the president, who keeps telling her that her son died for a noble cause, to tell her what that cause is. What's the other side of that? People who don't want to know why we're in Iraq?

There just is not always "another side" the more frequent cercumstance is that one side is made up of crackpots (ex-evolution vs. creationism). To suggest that all views deserve equal air time is nuts. If I claim that the sky is green does that mean that I deserve equal television time with someone who says the sky is blue? What if I claimed the the world was flat? Does that mean that I deserve television time to insist to millions of people that it is? No, because we all know that I am just wrong, so Howie Kurtz seems to suggest that if you have a view, its worth being heard, which is the biggest bunch of bullshit I can imagine.

Oh, wait, I found a bigger piece of bullshit.
Another Atrios post to the same note.
Taking "two sides" and giving them equal weight is not "being objective," especially since the Flying Spaghetti Monster was not given equal time. The Right has spent 30 years building the ultimate shit-flinging machine, and the press happily obliges it by giving a "fair hearing" to anything they come up with.

No comments: