Tempered Honesty

I would like to take this opportunity to applaud Andrew Alexander, Ombudsman of the Washington Post, for his attempt to chastise his own paper over its continued selective hearing: Why the silence from The Post on Black Panther Party story?. While he skirts the issue of his paper's tendency to support a progressive agenda, he does point out their lack of coverage on a significant issue.

For those not aware: the Justice Department has all but dropped a case involving members of the New Black Panther Party and voter intimidation in Philadelphia. As we all know, had the defendants belonged to the Klan, or any number of other equally offensive groups espousing violence against minorities, both the Justice Department and the Washington Post would have ridden the case into the next decade. The views expressed by members of the New Black Panther Party are no less violent or incendiary than their better known counterparts. The difference, it has been posited, is in historical perspective. I for one find little solace in the argument that a group can threaten violence against any other group or individual simply because they have a historical basis for their anger. Laws, and the application thereof, must be blind to color, status, agenda, and any other differentiating characteristic.

As for Mr. Alexander: his effort, while significant, suffers slightly from his willingness to dismiss his paper's oversight as the result of staff limitations. It is common knowledge that media outlets, both progressive and conservative, practice editorial reporting. His just got caught being obvious about it.