If It Weren't True THEY Wouldn't Let It Be Said

Except, of course, there is no "they."

I've heard that phrase too many times over the last few years. Like the friend that said he'd found the miracle cure for all that ails mankind, and almost overdosed on colloidal silver.

So though you may read something on my blog, you should know that everything I say here is MY opinion, and you have the choice of believing it or not. And heaven forbid you might have your own opinion. Because this IS America, and everyone CAN have their own opinion.

MY opinions last week about a certain newspaper don't amount to much, and don't become anywhere near fact, unless others say the same things, and can back their views with facts. Since I was only opining, I felt I did not need to do that. But out of curiosities' sake, I did go off looking for others' viewpoints mirroring my own.

And found quite a few.

One blog post¹ from Adam at glaadblog.org states, in part, that "[The Deseret News] has historically sought to be perceived as a credible mainstream media publication, dedicated to fair coverage of news stories." That is, it had done so until one Joe Cannon took over leadership of the paper as Editor-in-Chief. Adam further says "Though the paper’s editorial positions have always been closely aligned with those of the Mormon Church, the news coverage has been generally consistent with impartial, non-partisan mainstream journalistic standards."

Hmmm... "Mainstream journalistic standards". Like layouts, perhaps?

No, I did not dig back in any archival printed copies of the Deseret News to see if "above the fold" had been adhered to in the past. All I was saying last week is than in that here and now, it did not appear that those journalistic standards were being adhered to.

Interestingly enough, the thing that began Adam's blog post was an event that happened in February of this year: twelve reporters at the Deseret News had protested the treatment of their written articles; their protest was to remove their bylines from their articles. To the average American news reader, a byline may not mean much, but it is the "byline" which is the only thing that identifies the person who wrote the article. If enough of an article is altered such that it is no longer your words, then removing your byline is perfectly acceptable.

Adam further says in his post: "...that they [the reporters] believe that under [Joe Cannon's] direction, stories have been edited to present news through the filter of Mormon religious beliefs. In some cases, the protesters suggest stories were completely pulled because they did not strictly adhere to Mormon religious teachings and political views."

Again we see something I touched on in my posts last week. In my Above The Fold, the Deseret News said (through the Boston Globe article) that the "Election has spurred hate". In my Face and Hands post, the Deseret News speaks about how minorities are increasing in numbers statewide. If the Deseret News is in fact more strictly adhering to Mormon religious teachings and Mormon political views, where does that put them by placing those particular articles above the fold?

Now I'm done with the topic.

¹ I prefer to use the term "blog post" versus "article", unless the item I refer to is from an actual newspaper's website. That's just part of MY style guide.