Glasnost for the L.A. Times
As you’ve probably heard by now, editor Los Angeles Times John Carroll sent a scathing memo to all section editors on May 22, 2003, raising concerns about “the perception - and the occasional reality - that the Times is a liberal, ‘politically correct’ newspaper.” The memo focuses on a front-page “news” item on Texas’s abortion counseling law. Here’s the most damning portion:
Such a person makes no appearance in the story’s lengthy passage about the scientific issue. We do quote one of the sponsors of the bill, noting that he “has a professional background in property management.” Seldom will you read a cheaper shot than this. Why, if this is germane, wouldn’t we point to legislators on the other side who are similarly bereft of scientific credentials?
It is not until the last three paragraphs of the story that we finally surface a professor of biology and endocrinology who believes the abortion/cancer connection is valid. But do we quote him as to why he believes this? No. We quote his political views.
Apparently the scientific argument for the anti-abortion side is so absurd that we don’t need to waste our readers’ time with it.
[Emphasis added.]
Read the whole thing. They say that recognizing the problem is the first step on the road to recovery; may many more such steps follow.
Link via Calblog.
