Newspaper logo  
 
 
Local News & Opinion

Ref. : Civic Events

Ref. : Arts & Education Events

Ref. : Public Service Notices

Travel
Books, Films, Arts & Education
Letters

Ref. : Letters to the editor

Health Care & Environment

02.06 Swansea Bay tidal energy scheme 'must go ahead', say Lib Dems

02.06 Obama using final budget request to push for action against climate change

02.05 Take 2 Minutes To Learn Why Obama's $10 Fee On Oil Is So Important

02.05 Flint and the Long Struggle Against Lead Poisoning

02.04 Morocco to switch on first phase of world's largest solar plant

02.04 Zika virus: Rousseff tells all Brazilians to stamp out mosquito breeding grounds

02.04 US electricity industry's use of coal fell to historic low in 2015 as plants closed [if replacement natural gas use isn't hemorraging methane, this is good news]

02.04 Flint water crisis: Michigan officials ignored EPA warnings about toxicity

02.03 Researchers find birds can theorize about the minds of others, even those they cannot see

02.03 Ships' noise is serious problem for killer whales and dolphins, report finds

02.03 We’re drowning in cheap oil – yet still taxpayers prop up this toxic industry

02.03 German scientists to conduct nuclear fusion experiment

News Media Matters

02.05 It Takes a Movement to Create Fundamental Change [is change possible given the corporate-fawning orientation of news media]

02.05 Press Versus Liars: Doing Good Journalism in These Trying Times

Daily: FAIR Blog
The Daily Howler

US Politics, Policy & 'Culture'

02.06 Bernie Sanders can beat Hillary Clinton, and Conservatives should take note

02.06 ‘Something smells’: Top Iowa paper calls for ‘complete audit’ of Clinton’s win over Sanders [0:50 video]

02.06 The Vampire Squid Tells Us How to Vote

02.06 Speeches That Earned Clinton Millions Remain a Mystery [1:38 video]

02.06 Iowa Democratic party altered precinct's caucus results during chaotic night

02.04 New Hampshire town hall: Clinton and Sanders spar over progressive record [Bernie is full-throttle, but Clinton (and Obama) preemptively compromise progressive goals]

02.04 American capitalism has failed us: We’re overworked, underemployed and more powerless than ever before

02.04 Compared to Other Rich Countries, the United States Is Pretty Bad at Fighting Poverty

02.04 Election 2016: Elizabeth Warren Defends Bernie Sanders From Goldman Sachs Criticism

02.04 A tiny home of one's own: black women embrace the small house movement

02.03 Unemployment: The All-but-Certain Fate of Too Many Poor Black BoysUnemployment: The All-but-Certain Fate of Too Many Poor Black Boys

02.03 Clinton Campaign Goes on Tilt as a Result of Dead Heat With Sanders in Iowa

02.03 Jimmy Carter calls US campaign finance ruling 'legalised bribery' [0:50 video]

02.03 Bernie Sanders Knows What Time It Is

02.03 Bernie Sanders Just Changed the Democratic Party

Justice Matters

02.05 How Democracy Died in Flint [ALEC Is at It Again]

02.05 An Idiot’s Guide to Prosecuting Corporate Fraud

High Crimes?

02.05 FGM: number of victims found to be 70 million higher than thought

Economics, Crony Capitalism

02.05 Oil nations face years of pain, says IMF chief Christine Lagarde

02.05 Norway's oil-based wealth fund sells out of more fossil fuel companies

02.04 ICELAND SENTENCES 29TH BANKER TO PRISON, US BANKERS STILL COLLECTING BONUSES

International

02.06 Ban Ki-moon adds to pressure on UK to stop arms sales to Saudis

02.06 Aleppo siege looms as pro-Assad forces cut opposition supply lines

02.05 Women's rights crackdown exposes deepening crisis in Chinese society

02.05 America's Agitator: Donald Trump Is the World's Most Dangerous Man

02.05 EU Border Office Chief on Refugee Crisis: 'We Should Have No Illusions'

02.05 German UN Envoy on Islamic State's Rise: 'We Simply Can't Give Up on Libya'

02.04 Funds for Syria need to be ringfenced for women, civil society groups say

02.04 To Beirut with hope: how the city shaped by refugees makes room for new arrivals

02.04 Join or die The birth and horrifying rise of Boko Haram [A terrorist (and barbaric) response to inequality of wealth & income? Is ISIS the same?]

We are a non-profit Internet-only newspaper publication founded in 1973. Your donation is essential to our survival.

You can also mail a check to:
Baltimore News Network, Inc.
P.O. Box 42581
Baltimore, MD 21284-2581
Google
This site Web
  Print view: Why We Can't Trust the WSJ's ''Opinion'' Section
MEDIA CRITICISM:

Why We Can't Trust the WSJ's "Opinion" Section

The Wall Street Journal's failure to edit Karl Rove's misleading column on taxes is a case in point.

by Alice Cherbonnier
Sunday, 5 December 2010
Does the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics' first principle, that "deliberate distortion is never permissible," apply to writers, but not editors?

Where can the public turn today for accurate reporting? It used to be said that the Wall Street Journal's news reporting was impeccable because the power elite who read it would never forgive it for providing false information. Even those not among that exalted universe also once counted on the WSJ, especially during the pre-Murdoch era. This is not to say that the WSJ's editorial and opinion pages were similarly stellar back then, but since it was understood the paper had a certain viewpoint (pro-business, anti-tax, laissez-faire), one expected the articles on those pages to contain cherry-picked facts; after all, that's what such sections are for. At the least, though, one could believe the facts themselves—however they may have been twisted or misinterpreted to make a point—were solid, not squishy.

The Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists lays out a journalist's responsibilities. Among them: " Deliberate distortion is never permissible." Admittedly this Code of Ethics is voluntary, as there is no licensing or policing of journalists or columnists, nor is there any requirement for a particular sort of education or experience. Journalists must police themselves, and the public's job is to slam them when they don't.

Consider this column as such a slam, then. Let us take as a case in point the column by Karl Rove called "Nancy Pelosi's Unwelcome Christmas Gift," published on page A17 of the WSJ's opinion section on Thurs., Dec. 2. We've come to expect Karl Rove's writings to be unsatisfactory, but this one breaks new ground for disingenuousness. What were the WSJ's editors thinking when they published this? Did they even read it before they sent it out to millions of readers? Someone did: there's a "teaser" highlighting one of Rove's absurd assertions: "A couple earning $80,000 could lose hundreds per month if the Bush tax rates aren't extended."

Rove's beef is that Nancy Pelosi is insisting that the Obama tax cuts for those who earn under $250,000 a year should stay in place, but wants to see a rate hike on the portion of a taxpayer's taxable income that exceeds that amount. Rove leaves out the italicized information. He darkly warns us that "Congress could go home [for the holidays] without stopping the largest tax increase in the nation's history." Say what? The "increase" would be for only the top bracket, and it still would come nowhere near the top rate paid earlier in our history (up to 91%; now it's only 35%).

Rove fails to include essential facts needed to understand the U.S. Tax Code (contrary to the SPJ Code of Ethics: "[Journalists] should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.") He omits the fact that every single taxpayer pays the same tax rate at every step in the Tax Code. The Tax Rate Tables at the end of the link show clearly that every other taxpayer—including Rupert Murdoch, George Soros and Karl Rove—is subject to a mere 10% tax on the first $8,350 of taxable income (if filing as a single person). We're all subject to the same rates every step of the way. We all benefited from the Obama tax cuts, and under the Pelosi plan we will all retain all of them, except for the taxable income over the highest income threshhold.

Rove also omits mention of a huge tax benefit given to all taxpayers, but which disproportionately benefits the wealthy: capital gains income is subject to a piddling 15% tax rate.

Where were the WSJ editors in all this? Surely they have access to telephones, e-mail and fax machines so that they can query Rove and other op-ed contributors about their omissions, misstatements and flat-out lies. Or are these editors (Paul A. Gigot is the WSJ editorial page editor and Daniel Henninger is deputy editor) following the trend of their peers at other U.S. newspapers—of publishing op-ed submissions and syndicated material without providing any editorial input? The reader is then left to figure out whether the information is worthy, because the editors have abdicated their responsibility. Does the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics' first principle, that "deliberate distortion is never permissible," apply to writers, but not editors?

Look at what happens when the gate-keepers and vetters of information—editors—fail to edit: opinion pieces that should never have been published are circulated world-wide, and quoted by others as if they're fact.

Rove's "Christmas Gift" column got 564 comments (as of Dec. 3) on the WSJ website, but no one can post a comment unless he or she is a WSJ subscriber. Readers of the web version of Rove's column may wade through these comments, and in so doing they may be able to ferret out the full facts from among some wild assertions—tamed somewhat by the WSJ's laudable requirement that those posting comments must use their real names.

But what about the rest of the public? Why, they get served Rove's disingenuous tripe for breakfast on the cable and radio talk shows--with much hype and derision and incivility thrown in for entertainment value.

Anyone who wonders why this country appears to be an intellectual and brutal wasteland needs to trace the "supply chain" of information to the source: the editors at the Wall Street Journal and other "mainstream" media.


Alice Cherbonnier is the Managing Editor of the Baltimore Chronicle.



Copyright © 2010 The Baltimore News Network. All rights reserved.

Republication or redistribution of Baltimore Chronicle content is expressly prohibited without their prior written consent.

Baltimore News Network, Inc., sponsor of this web site, is a nonprofit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed in stories posted on this web site are the authors' own.

This story was published on December 5, 2010.
 


Public Service Ads: