This is off topic but relevant to the media's handling of polls, and I need to vent. I was incensed earlier this week to hear an NPR reporter cite a poll of Russians' attitudes about Putin's buildup to invading Ukraine. The reporter said 60% of Russians support what Putin is doing. Never mentioned who conducted the poll, including how ma…
This is off topic but relevant to the media's handling of polls, and I need to vent. I was incensed earlier this week to hear an NPR reporter cite a poll of Russians' attitudes about Putin's buildup to invading Ukraine. The reporter said 60% of Russians support what Putin is doing. Never mentioned who conducted the poll, including how many people responded. Or the fact that Russians neither have freedom of speech or a free press and face reprisals for speaking out against the government.
For good measure the reporter threw in a comment that Biden is "struggling" to deal with the Ukranian issue, the pandemic, inflation, and so on. Am I "struggling" when I'm trying to fix a leaky faucet or merely working to fix it? All of this, including using focus groups to gauge voter sentiment, is embarrassing and pathetic. As Gore Vidal once said: "At any given moment, public opinion is a chaos of superstition, misinformation, and prejudice."
That's the press for you - Biden is always "struggling" or "scrambling," as though he is incompetent. I think it smacks of ageism and political bias. The writers at WaPo do this daily.
That's because it's as entrenched as sexism. People make assumptions about older folks and it is prejudice in its purest form - when the assumptions are accepted as true without a second thought. Dr. Fauci is probably the most amazing scientific mind since Stephen Hawking, but if you'll check out the editorial by Kathleen Parker published in WaPo yesterday, you'll see how it reeks with ageism. She called for him to step down, and for the silliest of reasons. Readers ate her alive, which was heartening. And there was also sexism - a reader comment referred to her as a bimbo.
I don't see the ageism in Parker's column that you do. I do see suspect logic. For example, I very much doubt Fauci is worn down by all of his on-camera appearances. It's more like a crushing workload and living under the stress of threats on his life and that of his family. And in Parker's reasoning the legions of people who embrace lies, undermining public health, need someone in Fauci's role they can trust, someone who would make them "feel better."
BTW, I crossed paths with Parker while we worked at another newspaper years ago. She's no spring chicken — 71 like me.
You're entitled to your opinion, and being 71 doesn't mean you can spot ageism every time. I'm 64 and it jumped right out at me. I doubt Parker gives a dead rat's ass about Fauci's well being.
You're a little harsh given I'm simply expressing an opinion different than yours. We agree the column missed the mark. I don't claim to be an expert on ageism. And I mentioned my age because it's the same as Parker. I have experienced ageism, as early as my 50s.
This is off topic but relevant to the media's handling of polls, and I need to vent. I was incensed earlier this week to hear an NPR reporter cite a poll of Russians' attitudes about Putin's buildup to invading Ukraine. The reporter said 60% of Russians support what Putin is doing. Never mentioned who conducted the poll, including how many people responded. Or the fact that Russians neither have freedom of speech or a free press and face reprisals for speaking out against the government.
For good measure the reporter threw in a comment that Biden is "struggling" to deal with the Ukranian issue, the pandemic, inflation, and so on. Am I "struggling" when I'm trying to fix a leaky faucet or merely working to fix it? All of this, including using focus groups to gauge voter sentiment, is embarrassing and pathetic. As Gore Vidal once said: "At any given moment, public opinion is a chaos of superstition, misinformation, and prejudice."
That's the press for you - Biden is always "struggling" or "scrambling," as though he is incompetent. I think it smacks of ageism and political bias. The writers at WaPo do this daily.
Ageism is a factor that from my reading isn't often mentioned.
That's because it's as entrenched as sexism. People make assumptions about older folks and it is prejudice in its purest form - when the assumptions are accepted as true without a second thought. Dr. Fauci is probably the most amazing scientific mind since Stephen Hawking, but if you'll check out the editorial by Kathleen Parker published in WaPo yesterday, you'll see how it reeks with ageism. She called for him to step down, and for the silliest of reasons. Readers ate her alive, which was heartening. And there was also sexism - a reader comment referred to her as a bimbo.
I don't see the ageism in Parker's column that you do. I do see suspect logic. For example, I very much doubt Fauci is worn down by all of his on-camera appearances. It's more like a crushing workload and living under the stress of threats on his life and that of his family. And in Parker's reasoning the legions of people who embrace lies, undermining public health, need someone in Fauci's role they can trust, someone who would make them "feel better."
BTW, I crossed paths with Parker while we worked at another newspaper years ago. She's no spring chicken — 71 like me.
You're entitled to your opinion, and being 71 doesn't mean you can spot ageism every time. I'm 64 and it jumped right out at me. I doubt Parker gives a dead rat's ass about Fauci's well being.
You're a little harsh given I'm simply expressing an opinion different than yours. We agree the column missed the mark. I don't claim to be an expert on ageism. And I mentioned my age because it's the same as Parker. I have experienced ageism, as early as my 50s.
I'm not harsh. I'm direct. I don't sugarcoat what I'm thinking.