For all the hoopla about discrimination, the simple truth is everyone discriminates all the time. And that is just as true of the mainstream media, which so often crusades against what it considers to be the evils of discrimination. Every day the MSM is doing just as much discrimination as anyone else.
Consider the most recent edition of the Sunday Age. In its July 19th issue it ran two pieces, pushing a particular point of view. In doing so it was being extremely discriminatory, all the while whining about how bad it is to discriminate.
The two articles – a major feature story and a lead editorial – focused on the proposed changes to Victoria’s equal opportunity laws. The government is considering removing all religious exemptions from these laws, viewing them as being discriminatory. Thus in the two articles the case was strongly made that these exemptions must go, as they allow for all sorts of horrible “discrimination” by church groups and religious bodies.
Now taking what is really a neutral term and loading it with purely negative connotations is one way to sneakily make one’s case. But the truth is, we all discriminate all the time, and often for perfectly good reasons. And guess what? The Sunday Age is just as guilty of this as any religious body is.
So just how is the Sunday Age being discriminatory? Let me count the ways. It is being discriminatory when it:
-Takes one side of a controversial social or moral issue, and doggedly runs with that position.
-Decides to print articles on these topics.
-Uses these articles to push its own point of view.
-Selectively decides who will be quoted and who will not be quoted on this issue.
-Gives more time and print space to those who share its views.
-Edits out contrary points of view.
Moreover, the Sunday Age, like all newspapers, is being discriminatory when it:
-Hires certain people to write their editorials and opinion pieces, while excluding others.
-Determines who will be its editors, subeditors and other lesser lights.
-Chooses only certain journalists to cover a story.
-Decides which stories will be covered.
-Determines how much time and attention a particular issue will get.
-Uses graphics, photos and human interest stories to further bolster its case.
-Refuses to cover certain topics.
-Does not allow a certain point of view to get a hearing.
-Always portrays viewpoints contrary to its own in a derogatory light.
-Accepts or rejects a letter to the editor for publication.
-Edits a letter for publication.
-Gives a right of reply to only those who share its views.
The list is endless. Let me elaborate on a few of these points. As it turns out, I was interviewed for the feature story. Papers like the Age always want to give the appearance of being impartial and fair-minded, so they will usually offer at least a token conservative voice to be heard, although usually as a mere one-liner at the end of the article.
However, when the article appeared on Sunday there were no comments of mine to be found anywhere. So what happened there? Discrimination, that’s what. They simply chose to exclude me. Some subeditor probably decided they did not want my point of view, so it was axed. The word for this again? Discrimination.
And what about getting a job with the Sunday Age? Does anyone really believe they will hire anyone, regardless of their political, ideological or religious views? Somehow I don’t think so. Certainly not for key editorial positions. In my book that is called discrimination.
Would they ever consider hiring me? As it happens, I have been involved in journalism for a number of years. I even edited an underground newspaper back in my wild hippy days, before my suicidal and out of control life was turned around by an encounter with the living Christ. And with well over a million words written on this website alone, I have a bit of experience in writing, opinion-making, and commentary.
So in many ways I would be fully qualified to take on a position with this newspaper. But for ideological reasons, I know I will never get a job with them. I am just not politically correct enough for them. I am not leftwing enough. I am not secular enough. Thus I will always be discriminated against by the Sunday Age.
Thus this paper can please spare us this silliness that discrimination is somehow an evil which must be eradicated at all costs. Until I see papers like the Sunday Age drop all their discrimination, I will not take seriously their crocodile tears over other forms of discrimination.
Indeed, since it is clear that the Sunday Age has no intention whatsoever of dropping its discriminatory practices, why does it keep demanding that other groups – including religious bodies – not be allowed to be selective in who they hire, in what they believe, and so on?
Is this just one more case of liberal double standards? It seems pretty clear to me. And it also sounds a bit like discrimination.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/is-the-freedom-to-discriminate-a-human-right-20090718-doy0.html
http://www.theage.com.au/national/church-and-state-clash-over-equality-laws-20090718-dozx.html
[844 words]