Thinking is good and I’m always glad when others smarter than me think so.
Also glad when it’s acknowledged that a lot of this stuff about civil liberties and freedoms ‘an shit is complicated but worth the effort to understand.
So, okay, first, I acknowledge that Greenwald does note the outdated concept that sometimes issues bear reflection and revisiting, even by pretty people on the news, and to give props to Brian Williams for issuing a response (however fucking smarmy it was) to the anchor’s ridiculous “marriage under attack” schlock piece. (Who gives a crap about the marriage fidelity among the monarchy? Show me some praise hard-working schmucks with a double mortgage that have managed sixty years without a suicide pact- it’s not like they don’t exist.) Anyway, also, especially with regard to the rico suave middle-of-the-road-iness that Williams oozes, yes, yes, yes to this:
But would it ever be possible to compile enough evidence to force an abandonment of that most sacred, petulant and patently false Article of Faith among our right-wing warriors and their media allies — namely, that our establishment press is a “liberal media” that is hostile to conservatives?
However, I appreciate even more the tack taken by Good as You and GLAAD on this.
Good as You’s response to William’s response:
It’s very easy to attack the blogosphere as angry folks who are quick to judge. However, we take offense to that characterization, especially when talking about a situation that we still think should’ve been worded very differently. Even climbing divorce rates are not exactly an “attack” on marriage; the institution itself is not being maliciously targeted in such a hyperbolic fashion. So again, we appreciate that Mr. Williams responded to this. We just wish he wouldn’t have done so by painting it as if it was a situation that was easy to understand, if only those pesky, angry bloggers hadn’t been so irrational.
Pesky itchy hippies, always complicating things with their scratching.
And, GLAAD’s Neil G. Giuliano runs home for the point with:
The phrase ”marriage under attack” — like “defense of marriage,” which you use elsewhere in your blog entry — is a meme designed and used by far-right anti-gay activists to scare people into opposing legal protections for gay couples. Media professionals who talk about marriage-related issues in their reporting should simply and factually discuss them, rather than uncritically repeating rhetoric calculated to make people feel threatened by and afraid of loving, committed couples.
GLAAD’s work is rooted in the fundamental understanding that words and images matter. We expect that future NBC News reporting on marriage — both generally and for gay couples specifically — avoids these kinds of linguistic pitfalls.
See? That wasn’t so hard, was it?