One of the late Danny Thomas’ favorite expressions of exasperation
was “Holy Toledo!” I have no idea what it was supposed to mean — or the
derivation of this particular phrase. But it seems very appropriate to
the story I’m about to relate to you.
Last Friday, the Toledo Blade, a daily newspaper in Ohio, caught up
to a
controversy covered by WorldNetDaily regarding the local
library. The story of how the library rejected a donation of a critical biography of Margaret Sanger and other books deemed politically incorrect was picked up first by Dr. Laura Schlessinger, who read one WorldNetDaily story about the Toledo library on the air.
Do you want to know how and why this kind of censorship takes place in Toledo and many other communities around the country? This little anecdote will provide some insight.
Clearly there are some people working at the Toledo-Lucas County Public Library who have a political motivation and an ideological agenda in their methodology for book selection. And I strongly suspect Toledo’s library is not unusual in that regard. It’s just that we caught them red-handed in this instance.
But, notice how the Toledo Blade enters the picture last Friday.
In an un-bylined story reported, according to the city desk, by
Rebecca Scott, George Grant, the author of the Sanger biography, is alleged to say he sees nothing wrong with the library’s decision not to carry the book.
“Dr. Grant called the library problem ‘a tempest in a teapot’ and the website (WorldNetDaily) reports ‘Paleolithic conservatism,'” the report continued.
WorldNetDaily.com was characterized by the Blade article as a “conservative news site” — a label many regular readers know we reject and detest.
Of course, no one from the Toledo Blade bothered to call anyone at WorldNetDaily for comment or clarification.
And all that provides insight into how this kind of low-intensity book-burning is not only permitted in towns like Toledo, but actually encouraged by the local media.
The Toledo Blade would never have touched this story if it had not been forced to cover it by WorldNetDaily and the talk radio follow-ups. Then the coverage was designed to minimize the impact. It’s what you call covering your behind: “Hey, we didn’t miss a story here. Those ‘conservatives’ — Dr. Laura and WorldNetDaily — are just manufacturing news.”
I’ve seen that a thousand times. Local reporters and editors are defensive about their turf. It’s natural. That didn’t even bother me much.
What did surprise me was the fact that author George Grant seemed to join in the gratuitous labeling of WorldNetDaily and the downplaying of the story — in stark contrast to his earlier remarks to our reporter.
So I e-mailed Grant.
“Hey,” I said, “what gives?” Now I don’t know George Grant. Never met him. Never talked to him. But I was familiar with his work. And I couldn’t believe he would be critical of WorldNetDaily or the story we had done.
Turns out my instincts were right, again.
“I am amazed at the way this reporter twisted my comments to fit her agenda,” he wrote back.
Grant says he never labeled WorldNetDaily or its reports as “Paleolithic conservatism.” That’s what he called himself. Secondly, contrary to the Blade report, he claims he never said he thought it was OK for the library to ban his books.
“Indeed, the bits and pieces of the rest of the quote make it plain that I thought the library was biased in a perverted way — I did say, however, that it happened all the time and that we ought to expect it. In that sense, I said it was a tempest in a teapot.”
Not only was he not critical of WorldNetDaily in any way, he says he told the reporter he reads it every day and that it is his favorite news source.
“This is the kind of stuff that really burns me up,” he concluded.
Well, George … me too.
It burns me up. And it demonstrates so artfully just how this kind of narrow-minded bigotry and petty injustice can go undetected and unchecked in a thousand Toledos across the country.