Platapus
03-16-08, 12:30 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/14/dirty.air.ap/index.html
Sounds pretty bad right? Nice strong headline that clearly portrays the underlaying story.
Well almost. You have to read a few more paragraphs to understand that what the headlines said was not really what happened.
It appears that there are two EPA standards for smog.
1. Human health
2. Public Welfare
The standards are different and have different quantities they are restricting. There is debate whether one should be higher, both should be higher and debate is good.
The President wants both standards to be the same. Whether this is the correct decision or not can be debated. What is clear is that despite the headlines, Bush was not "asking for a weaker smog standard", he was asking for them to match.
This fuels my ever growing disgust about the media. Report the news, let the readers love or hate bush as they see fit. But make the headlines at least accurately convey the meat of the article. How many people not willing to read a few paragraphs (95% of the citizens I think) will gloss over this headline and get the wrong idea.
Whether the standards are good bad or indifferent is not the issue here, what my issue here is why does the media mislead the reader like this?
"Bush asked for consolidated smog standards" does not have the same emotional appeal I guess.
Sounds pretty bad right? Nice strong headline that clearly portrays the underlaying story.
Well almost. You have to read a few more paragraphs to understand that what the headlines said was not really what happened.
It appears that there are two EPA standards for smog.
1. Human health
2. Public Welfare
The standards are different and have different quantities they are restricting. There is debate whether one should be higher, both should be higher and debate is good.
The President wants both standards to be the same. Whether this is the correct decision or not can be debated. What is clear is that despite the headlines, Bush was not "asking for a weaker smog standard", he was asking for them to match.
This fuels my ever growing disgust about the media. Report the news, let the readers love or hate bush as they see fit. But make the headlines at least accurately convey the meat of the article. How many people not willing to read a few paragraphs (95% of the citizens I think) will gloss over this headline and get the wrong idea.
Whether the standards are good bad or indifferent is not the issue here, what my issue here is why does the media mislead the reader like this?
"Bush asked for consolidated smog standards" does not have the same emotional appeal I guess.