Friday, March 21, 2003
previous entry | main | next entry | TrackBack (0)
HAVE PROTESTORS HIJACKED THE WASHINGTON
HAVE PROTESTORS HIJACKED THE WASHINGTON POST?: Generally, the Post is perceived as more balanced than the New York Times, but if you click on their World page right now, you might believe that antiwar activists have seized control of the paper. (UPDATE: Not surprisingly, the page has been updated. What follows was true at the time I first posted this, however).
Why do I say that? This is the first big story headline you see:
Which is perfectly fine, certainly important and newsworthy, yada, yada, yada. I'm not objecting to the substance of the coverage. It's just that the second big story headline is:
The first story was in today's print edition, while the second is an AP report from this afternoon (there's also this story about protests in Arab countries).
Now, isn't it a bit much to give the biggest play to both of these stories? Don't the headlines suggest a fair amount of redundancy? And isn't there a glaring contradiction in the headlines? It reminds me of this Doonesbury strip from the days of yore.posted by Dan on 03.21.03 at 04:14 PM