what a useless article!
i just ran across an article that i think really exemplifies the total degeneration of the media. here you can find an article about the debate surrouding jada pinkett smith's comments at the harvard foundation's cultural rhythms show. apparently the comments were offensive to the GLBT community, and the article presents both sides of the debate, including quotes from people who either approved or disapproved - but never presents her actual comments! i mean, i understand that this is a very minute issue, and that the media has no responsibility to inform us of every word that comes out of jada pinkett's mouth, but isn't it a little silly to write an entire article about the controversy surrounding her comments without just coming out and saying what her comments were?
it's a perfect example of how modern media coverage has become more about controversy than about substance - like the swift boat veterans for truth ads last year. so much more time was spent talking about the fact that there were two conflicting accounts than actually discussing what those two accounts were, or whose account actually had official military paperwork backing it up. how annoying!
posted by stefanie @ 4:34 PM
9 comments
9 Comments:
Yeah, people are so motivated to show their support or condemnation of any utterance or idea that they quickly lose sight of the original object and just go with the opinion.
Reminds me of all the critics of Harvard President Summers's recent comments (about innate differences in abilities, concerns and preferences between men and women as they pertain to scientific careers). Journalists and activists just went off about how horrible his comments were and how they set back the movement for equality, yet nearly every article mis-quoted him! (the actual transcript of his speech came out later)
carin, the larry summers thing is such a good point. people got so swept up in the controversy that they didn't even care what he actually said. but i've been tracking that situation a little because i work in education policy (sort of) and here's what i think: his answer, that there are hard-wired processing differences between men and women, is so obvious that no one should bother being offended by it. but the problem is that he wasn't asked why fewer women receive PhDs in math/science, to which that would have been a reasonable response. he was asked why fewer women fill tenured positions in those fields. tons more women have PhDs in those fields than have tenured or tenure track positions at major research institutions (including Harvard), and that's the disparity that he was asked to address. so, i wasn't so much offended by his comment that there are innate differences as i was by the fact that he doesn't understand the difference between the question he was asked and the question he answered.
I see your point, Stef. He did sort of address it by implying that most women do not prefer to work 80hr/week jobs that perhaps a tenured professor would have to do. He also provided the explanation that many women want to have children and that if they do, they tend to have a very hard time achieving tenure, or getting back into the field to do so. Both are understandable points. But I agree with you that his point about innate differences in preferences, while correct, was the answer to a different question.
The Larry Summers thing is American media run amok. I'm glad you guys are on the same page with me.
The Larry Summers thing is American media run amok. I'm glad you guys are on the same page with me.
bogdan, you are a freaking genius. that quote couldn't be more on the mark.
larry summers wishes he'd been asked why women aren't as good at science as men because that's what he really thinks, which is why the hallmark of his harvard presidency has been his failure to reach out to women, and harvard has consequently fallen behind other major research institutions in the percentage of female tenured faculty/tenure-trackers...
Stef, you should see "The Fog of War." It's an excellent film.
okay, it's in my netflix queue! right after "harold and kumar go to white castle," "i heart huckabees," and "steel magnolias." what a weekend!
Stef, I hope you enjoy I Heart Huckabees. I thought it was a cute, whimsical (yet thought-provoking) film that can easily take one out of the repitition of everyday life. And Mark Walhberg turned out to be my fave character in it which I was not expecting.
Post a Comment
<< Home