Replies

in these new church activities the clergy are inspired by things read, not in ancient Hebrew texts, but in the daily newspapers.

Journalists claim that journalism is “the first draft of history.” They also claim to be objective. Yet there is no way to even try to be objective without first examining your own motives to scrutinize the possibility that where you stand is influenced by where you sit. If you claim actually to be objective, you are starting out with the assumption that you don’t even have motives of your own. Obviously, that assumption forecloses the possibility of seriously examining your own motives - and thus implies that you cannot be even trying to be objective.
So here we are, with a journalism which makes risible claims to objectivity, also claiming to be the first draft of history. Since we know that they tend to make false claims, we can reject the later claim out of hand. In reality, journalism is biased in favor of its own reputation and against anyone whose claims to deserving credit derive not from mere words and criticism but from action taken “actually in the arena.”
The extent to which those fatuous claims of journalism were accepted in the past has been tragic.
In the here and now, we have a journalism, Fox News Channel, which gained high ratings by staking a claim to “Fairness” and “Balance.” The Republican Party, disgusted by the effect of having a “debate” (joint news conference) conducted in by other “news” organizations in prior election cycles, awarded the opportunity to conduct its first “debate” this year to FNC. FNC responded, not by conducting the kind of softball questioning to which other news organizations subject Democrat politicians but by earning the applause of those organizations by treating the Republicans the way they would have done.
FNC has their “in group” applause, and all it cost them was their fair and balanced reputation for being different from those other organizations - and thus meriting the attention of viewers who demanded that.
FNC can, of course, redeem its reputation. All it needs to do is to subject Democrat presidential candidates, including Hillary Clinton, to a level of pressure proportionate that it applied to Donald Trump and the rest of the Republican field. If Donald Trump had a 20% rating and FNC raised five issues about Donald Trump, and each issue received three minutes’ grilling by FNC on live TV, Hillary has an 80% rating and two dozen issues at least as serious as Trump’s five. A proportionate treatment would require FNC to grill Hillary, not the same as they did Trump, and not five times as much since she has higher ratings, but at least twenty five times as much. At a minimum. I wish FNC all success in that endeavor. But I don’t like their chances of pulling it off.