Mark Steyn: UN Fetish

The Jerusalem Post ^ | May 18, 2004 | Mark Steyn

[McGavin999]

Are the media perfect? No.

Are the media good? After these last two weeks, I think I'll pass on that one.

I'll answer that one for you. No, the media is not good. The media has failed.

[jwalburg]

"Why is it that there's more indignation over a photo of a prisoner with underwear on his head than over the video of a young American with no head at all?"

Probably too long to be made into a new tagline, unfortunately. Oh wait! A little editing and shazzam! Thanks, Zell.

[DeuceTraveler]

Actually, Human Rights Watch is currently focusing mostly on the US at this time. However, if you go to their site you can find broad criticism against Middle East regimes, China, and North Korea. Also they are covering the genocide in Sudan. Here's their UN section:

http://www.hrw.org/doc/?t=united_nations

[Rastus]

I hope this isn't some dark secret I'm not supposed to ask, but what's the deal with the posting of the Steyn columns? Invariably, quidnunc posts an excerpt, and someone else posts the full thing. People then thank the second poster for posting the whole thing. So, why isn't the full thing just posted the first time?

[maryz]

It shows, too - there is no-one so offended as a liar who is called a liar on a rare occasion when he tells the truth.

In my experience, there is no one so offended as a liar who is called a liar even when he's lying.

[7thson]

OUTSTANDING!!!

I am forced to pass this on and hope that it breaks through the wall of certain muddleheaded dunderheads.

[finnigan2]

"Invariably, quidnunc posts an excerpt, and someone else posts the full thing. People then thank the second poster for posting the whole thing. So, why isn't the full thing just posted the first time?"

- What you are seeing has been going on for longer than the Hatfield/McCoy feud. Quidnunc ALWAYS posts excerpts because his is a principled stand against copyright infringement or some such legal technicality that would be violated if he were to reproduce the whole article. A number of other freepers are upset at this and immediately post the whole story to show that they think he's being a pain. The unfortunate side effect is that while most readers really look forward to Stein's articles, this running dispute has caused many to stop reading the stories since half the postings consist of sniping back and forth over the, "to post, or not to post" issue.

[quidnunc]

Rastus wrote: I hope this isn't some dark secret I'm not supposed to ask, but what's the deal with the posting of the Steyn columns? Invariably, quidnunc posts an excerpt, and someone else posts the full thing. People then thank the second poster for posting the whole thing. So, why isn't the full thing just posted the first time?

It's a violation of a little thing called federal copyright law to do more thaqn excerpt copyrighted material.

[quidnunc]

finnigan2 wrote: ("Invariably, quidnunc posts an excerpt, and someone else posts the full thing. People then thank the second poster for posting the whole thing. So, why isn't the full thing just posted the first time?") - What you are seeing has been going on for longer than the Hatfield/McCoy feud. Quidnunc ALWAYS posts excerpts because his is a principled stand against copyright infringement or some such legal technicality that would be violated if he were to reproduce the whole article. A number of other freepers are upset at this and immediately post the whole story to show that they think he's being a pain. The unfortunate side effect is that while most readers really look forward to Stein's articles, this running dispute has caused many to stop reading the stories since half the postings consist of sniping back and forth over the, "to post, or not to post" issue.

Whnat the people who like Steyn's writing need to ask themselves is what will they do if the peoplke who took over the hollinger newspapers forbid any posting of their content like Gannett did.

Then there won't even be exceprts form Steyn's articles.

By the way, Gannett hasn't forbidden posting of it's content on Luciasnne.com, which is a conservative site too.

The difference is that L.com limits articles to a 75-word excerpt and a link.

[hopespringseternal]

Are the media good?

Not even close. They are wholly devoted to the big lie. The details are true, but they only give you the details that lead you to the big lie and none that point out the untruth of the big lie. They are frauds almost to a man.

[Rastus]

Okay, thanks. I was just curious and don't want to derail this thread, but now I understand the situation.

[an amused spectator]

By the way, Gannett hasn't forbidden posting of it's content on Luciasnne.com, which is a conservative site too.

The difference is that L.com limits articles to a 75-word excerpt and a link.

Copyright law doesn't allow for such differences. That's just the way it is, baby.

[NZerFromHK]

The best rule of politics is this: Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good.

I think a lot of us Christians have troubles accepting this argument. They think as Christians we must walk in the maximum degree of holiness we already know and which in turn implies if you make the slightest sin, it is still sin nonetheless and you are just as guilty as the worst sinner in the world.

This comes up with another interesting contention. Do we need to accept the premise of moral relativism in our case. To put in an analogy, suppose student A is a A+ student and he consistently gets 97% in tests. Now he gets only 85%. And student B is only able to achieve 30% in the test and he gets exactly 30% in that test. So B could actually blast A for his shortcomings and he is "worse" than B himself even though A still gets more than twice his testscores. Is this a valid basis for having relativism around us?

[NZerFromHK]

Yes, but the problem is many American media neglect them because on essence they can't be used as ammunitions against domestic politicians they don't them (and you don't need to be an einstein to figure out who they hate :)).

Besides, these human rights organisation believe as if domestic nationalism over-rules general abuse on their report scale. So for instance a native dictatorship and a colonial regime commit the same abuses, the native dictatorship may get a B- and the colonial regime could end up with a D+. This is another example of relativism that I don't buy into.

[Tares]

bttt

[NovemberCharlie]

Ping to the Steyn List, and to your list.

[Ruth A.]

Steyn's brillant articles get buried too quickly when excerpted. Bump from the archives.

The 2002 Save the Children report on the UN's cover-up of the sex-for-food scandal in West Africa provides grim details of peacekeepers' demanding sexual favors from children as young as four in exchange for biscuits and cake powder.

What do we want? Out of the U.N. When do we want it? NOW!!!!

[knighthawk]

Ping