Please, BBC is also politically correct and biased piece of garbage. "The Today programme devoted most of the half-hour between 7 and 7.30 to the anniversary [of the 7/7 bombings]. As Sarah Montague so perceptively pointed out, today is the day when "four British men blew themselves up" (an Englishman, a Scotsman, an Irishman and a Welshman ?), but it was 7.23 before the M- or I-words were mentioned - when Church of England Bishop Tony Robinson told us that the bombers 'weren't Muslims at all' " http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/
Riserburn gets it. The media is a business. Period. People who use worn phrases like "watch-dog" and "public good" are the same rubes who scold Charles Barkley for having a potty mouth in front of young fans. Get a clue. From the earliest days of newspapers, media moguls have known, as does anyone selling a product, delivering what the people wants is a moneymaker. Some want a liberal bent. Voila, the NYT and CBS. Fox was smart enough to know, in the aftermath of Bernard Goldberg's best selling expose' Bias, many American's were distrustful of "Big Three's" liberal bent. Thus they fill a void. Everyone has their favorite candy bar. Yet we all know each candy is equally bad for our teeth.
Of course it is a business, which is why the "liberal and elite media" spin by the right is so full of crap. It is a business, and business is not so good for some of the big businesses: http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0627/p09s01-codc.html
That's a big beef of mine also, doodoo. It's as if giving the motive or affiliation of the terrorists is insensitive or something. On the other hand, to this day I'll hear Timothy McVeigh described as a "right wing" terrorist when the motive for Oklahoma City seems to have been based on his hatred of the U.S. government because of the Gulf War. Yet has anyone ever heard McVeigh described as "uber-war protester"? P.S. I sent the SoFla Sun Sentinel a terse e-mail a couple of years back. They printed a description of a robbery suspect"a 6'00 male about 185lbs., black hair worn in a "corn-row" style wearing a blue shirt with black pants." WTF: Is it too PC to print the COLOR of the person being sought? Jeez!
And if the suspect had a big nose, should the paper, by your logic, have said they were a Jew? <img src=http://www.singaporesoxfan.com/photos/cornrow.jpg> <img src=http://image04.webshots.com/4/4/76/55/56647655rAANKX_ph.jpg> <img src=http://abaco.harpswell.com/images/Corn_Row_Triple_J.jpg> <img src=http://www.glassonion.net/pizatch/010703cornrow00.JPG> Even David Beckham... <img src=http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39241000/jpg/_39241487_becks300.jpg>
Unless they were trying to get the public to be on the lookout for the suspect to assist in apprehension, there is no reason to describe race. Who knows, maybe the police asked that the suspect's race not be revealed.
You're really in your own little world aren't you? http://blogs.chron.com/aboutchron/archives/2005/07/race_matters_to.html