« Can the CAT Scan | Main | Man's Best Friend »

Comments

D.D.

I like your blog...think you're reaching on the bias here though.
From what I've read on the issue, President Bush's policies have little or nothing to do with the trend of safer mines. Most of that comes from a combination of increasingly better technology, and a number of smaller mines being bought up by larger companies with (we would assume) access to better equipment and larger safety staffs.

I can see what you mean about how its disturbing that the media would paint this as Bush's fault. To be fair, though, if Bush did campaign on safer mines, and we just had a very public mine tragedy, it's a fact the reporter is obliged to point out.

Also, I find the President's tendency to stock government agencies with cronies, especially in instances like this one where the Dept. of the Interior is basically run by big coal and oil, to be VERY disturbing...how that relates to this tragedy notwithstanding. (And I think you're right that it doesn't nessecarily relate here).

And it's impossible for an editorial to be biased. Or, I guess, it's impossible for them NOT to be biased. That's what they're for. I get soo sick of people citing newspapers editorial pages as examples of a political agenda.

Anyway...my two cents.

Jim

And then people have the audacity to say that the media isn't biased. I know better...

Peg K

DD - thanks for depositing your 2 cents! As for your comments...

I agree with you that on occasion, Bush is too liberal (if you will) with putting cronies who would not be the best folk for the job IN some jobs.

I also agree with you that editorials, almost by definition - are biased. They are opinion; opinion is belief and bias and not strictly factual.

On the other hand, the items in this post are SUPPOSED to be reporting; not editorial. As such, they should not be painting the President as worse on mine safety; the facts are contrary to this.

Now - you may argue that Bush isn't that responsible for the improvements in safety. And, perhaps you are correct; I do not know.

Nevertheless, no matter the cause, the result is: better safety. Reporters should tell that - and not try to make one tragedy into a pictorial that's false.

The comments to this entry are closed.