The press is not only biased. It’s often stupid.
— Michael Medved, May 17, 1996
When you look at the collective output of a newspaper, it becomes pretty
obvious that the members of a janitor’s union possess more intelligence,
high-school dropouts more relevant insight, and drunken hobos more
wisdom. To make matters worse, the typical claptrap that passes for
reporting often oozes with something far less than complete accuracy,
hence H.L. Mencken’s tag for newspapermen: “a gang of pecksniffs.”
The latest exhibit of gross idiocy in this bumbling parade of bumfodder
— commonly referred to as “the American press” — comes from my
hometown paper, the Sacramento Bee. Last week, a headline regarding two
nudnik brothers suspected in burning down three Sacramento-area
synagogues boldly claimed that “Arson suspects had stern childhood.” Bad
enough this article was printed at all — worse still, it was the lead
story in the Sunday paper.
Attributing the suspected terrorism of the dastardly duo to their
“stifling” religious upbringing, as the article implicitly does, is so
patently absurd, the editor should have either booted the reporter in
the pants or walloped him over the head with a sock full of lead
buckshot.
To make a cause-effect link between a stern upbringing and torching
three places of worship demonstrates a shockingly low level of
perspective — or a purposeful ignorance. What about all the millions of
Americans raised with stern upbringings who, believe it or not, have
never dreamed about burning down a synagogue?
They do exist. Take me, for instance.
I was raised in a pretty stern environment — in terms of my religion,
perhaps one of the sterner around. You see, my dad’s one of those
Calvinists, the people who think that all of mankind is utterly fallen,
wretched, and given over to total depravity — especially newspapermen.
Given that, here’s the real shocker: to date, I haven’t killed any
homosexuals, shot any abortion doctors, or slugged a solitary soul for
his race, creed, or color.
Imagine that.
On the flip side, guess who has? If your memory is as short as the Bee
reporter, you’ve probably forgotten already about the two self-mopers in
black trench coats who performed their April 20 reenactment of Helter
Skelter using the innocent students at Columbine High School for props.
How about their parents? Real tightwads, right? Quick with the belt
leather and Bible lessons? Laying down the law with enough severity to
scare Moses? Parents with a real “boys will never be boys if we can help
it” mentality? Not so. The parents of the Colorado terrorists were so
lax, they either didn’t know or care that their darling little hellions
were busy illegally purchasing weapons and building bombs in the garage.
The two went to an upscale school, one drove a BMW, and both had parents
that only wanted to make them happy.
I’m not so sure it worked.
Anyone should be able to see it didn’t work, and anyone with an IQ over
50 should have been able to remember it long enough to balance his
report with at least a qualification that stern doesn’t equal
psychopath, any more that lax equals choirboy and YMCA director. Any
person whose mind links cause and effect in such a way, ignoring
contradicting facts, probably shouldn’t even be delivering internal
memos at a paper, let alone writing its news.
It is stories like this that contribute to the well-earned image of
newspapermen being third-rate hucksters and muck-spouts. The editor
could have said to the reporter, “Look, this kind of tripe is better
suited public restrooms.”
“A little bathroom reading material?” the na?f might have questioned.
“No,” the editor should have answered with a sneer, “a little bathroom
wiping material.” But he didn’t take the reporter to task. He let the
bumf go to press.
Talking with the Bee’s ombudsman, Sanders LaMont, about the article, he
said that the article avoided any strict cause-effect attribution,
focusing instead on letting the reader draw the inference. Granted, but
the intended inference is not mistakable. Any profile about two heinous
killers and terrorists which dwells exclusively on the upbringing of the
two is bound to imply a connection unless the reporter points out
otherwise — which he never really does.
Just the closing paragraph alone is enough to leave the impression —
either by design or lack of wits — that it was a rotten upbringing that
drove the two to commit their heinous acts. “If the boys did all those
things,” the article closes, quoting a neighbor of the Williams
brothers, “there was an awful lot of hate in that house.” The neighbor
woman added that she “stood out here and blessed the house last night to
get that hate out.”
Give me a break.
Any reporter or newspaper editor who’d pass off this schlock as decent
reporting should be sent to the nearest unemployment office to wax
floors. This article is fundamentally misleading, either by accident,
laziness, or design, and should have never cleared the editor’s desk —
except to be stuffed into the nearest garbage can.
Joel Miller is the Assistant Editor of
WorldNetDaily.
