October 30, 2002
PASSIVE VOICE SAID TO BE KEY WEAPON IN JOURNALISTIC SUPPORT FOR ANTIWAR MOVEMENT: Well, that’s my explanation for the headline over this puff piece in the New York Times, headlined “Rally in Washington Is Said to Invigorate the Antiwar Movement.”
As is typical for these pieces in the Times, the quotes are all from demonstrators who say their demonstration was a success. A more accurate headline would be “Rally in Washington is Said by Ralliers to be Success.” Coming soon: “Enron Accounting Said to Be Legitimate, Even Noble,” in a story interviewing only Enron accountants. Of course these people think their rally was a success. And of course the Times swallows it whole, because it wants the rally to look successful. Looks like another case of Creeping Rainesism to me.
Can you imagine the Times giving this treatment to, say, a rally by the Second Amendment Sisters? Of course not. They’d have lots of quotes from people with impressive-sounding credentials saying that the demonstration was a terrible thing for America.
Here, they might at least have quoted one of the pro-war Iraqi-Americans.
UPDATE: Jim Henley gives a better-supported and more objective report than the Times — and he was a participant in the march!
ANOTHER UPDATE: Jim Henley emails:
This may make the march piece the first blog item to be favorably cited by Instapundit and Antiwar.com on the same day. I have the e-mail in to Guinness now.
Jim, you should take this as either a sign that you’re doing something right, or that you’re doing something very, very, very wrong. . . .