Entirely too much homework to post what I intended to yesterday, but here's a brief rundown.
*the DU runs a curious article about Dr. King's daughter's UVSC speech with the subheadline "Human rights still a dream but can be reality." Oddly enough, the article doesn't actually quote King as saying this (she does say some things I could quibble with, but doesn't say that human rights don't exist today). So the question is is this normal DU incompetance, or something more sinister? If it's deliberate slanting of the article, what does it hope to accomplish? My guess is that it has more of an effect to discredit King that it does to promote her message, but whether or not that was the intention of the headline writer is hard to say.
*I didn't watch Tuesday's Devotional yet, and thus have not yet formulated an opinion on 'the modesty issue.'
*An incoherant anti-Bush-immigration-plan editorial manages to neatly contradict itself in the final two paragraphs, claiming that Bush is 'leaving his Republican base,' yet doing so to '[gain] popularity for the primaries.' Does this even make sense (well, about as much as the editorial assertion that the capture of Saddam alone would guarantee reelection, if not for this immigration plan)?
*An amusing editorial on the power of film, which, among other things, touts the power of LOTR and To Kill a Mockingbird. If you think the films are good, you should try reading the books.
*The letters to the editor were fairly uninteresting--a whiner complaining about having to actually learn something in religion classes, and another whiner neatly mixing up who actually is wanting to play without paying in Iraqi reconstruction.
*Still no idea why newsnet doesn't update its 'opinion' online content. Though since the only reason I want it online is so I can link my criticisms to the original banality, maybe it's enlightened self-defense on their part.
No comments:
Post a Comment