Harry at Squaring the Globe notes that the Boston Globe is once again citing ubiquitous expert "Some" in its headlines again.
That perrennial newsroom celebrity, 'some', a fellow who often seems to make the Globe headlines, scores again in today’s Boston Globe in the front page above-the-fold headline:
Hospital crisis has some doubting O'Malley's leadershipHowever the headline is ill-suited to the article’s content. Of all the people quoted in the article by reporter Michael Paulson, only one is specifically critical of the Cardinal, and he is (surprise!) quoted first. All others quoted are either generic in their criticism or outright supportive of O’Malley. The lone critic quoted is Richard J. Santagati, president of Merrimack College.
Apparently in Globe newsroom arithmetic ‘some’ = 1 + 1 reporter.
As I've said before, when a reporter says "Some critics say..." or similar constructions, that's a clue that the reporter is talking about himself or people he wants to exist but can't find. It's making a story where there isn't one.
Technorati Tags:
media bias, Catholic, Boston
‘when a reporter says “Some critics say…” or similar constructions, that’s a clue that the reporter is talking about himself or people he wants to exist but can’t find. It’s making a story where there isn’t one.’
…or people who he doesn’t want to cite—because they’re his peers and the people he hangs out with, and he feels confident more folks are out there, but he’s too lazy to go find them.
I hear ‘some’ people don’t even read the Globe.
Could the “some” who doubt Cardinal O’Malley’s leadership and desire to discredit him have included Helen Drinan,herself, right from the beginning? Did she really have pure intentions?Or did she know that her very public actions would put a strangle-hold on Cardinal O’Malley’s voice therefore having the effect of putting a strangle-hold on his voice regarding the upcoming Constitutional Convention at which the vote on the Marriage Amendment is supposed to be a major issue? Did she operate from the agenda that is fostered at the Jesuit Urban Center where she goes to worship despite the fact that she is a resident of Cohasset(as reported in the Globe,5/27/06)? Anyone who is familiar with the Jesuit Urban Center knows that Fr.Thomas Carrol,S.J. was an avid supporter of same-sex marriage and testified to this before the Mass. State Legislature in 2002. To this day ,the Jesuit Urban Center is strongly in support of the GLBT agenda and would do anything they could to discredit Cardinal O’Malley’s voice on this issue because of his support for the Marriage Amendment which is scheduled to be presented for a vote on July 12. Did Helen Drinan intend to have an honest relationship with Cardinal O’Malley and tell him directly about her concerns about Dr. Haddad’s behavior which some women were complaining about. In fact, did she ever actually talk to Dr. Haddad,himself, about these compalints? Or did she use the situation to make a public display? Did Helen Drinan,herself, supply the Walter Robinson at the Globe with the letter marked “Confidential” that she wrote to Cardinal O’Malley? Did she know that the Globe would be publishing this confidential letter? Did she tell Cardinal Law that she was giving the letter to the Globe if she,indeed, was the one who gave it to the Globe for publication?
In weighing all of the circumstances of this Globe “scoop”, I think that these questions should be addressed. Certainly any efforts to discredit Cardinal O’Malley in as negative way as possible by way of the Globe which would do anything to make sure that same-sex marriage becomes further embedded in Massachusetts law and in the sex education of our students, was successful. Has anyone seen any evidence that the Globe objects to acts of same-sex sex among studetns who are minors? The Globe strongly supports the GLBT agenda being embedded in schools. The Globe never makes those actions public! Why?
P.S. I meant to say “Did she tell Cardinal O’Malley(not Cardinal Law) that she was giving the letter to the Globe.
The phrase”having employees focusing on their job rather than covering up who they are” is the part that obfuscates and camouflages the situation. Acts of same-sex sex are as sinful as acts of adultry. If a co-worker feels the need to talk about these sinful acts, they can always go to a priest and confess their sins. What are they accomplishing by telling their co-workers all about their sinful relationships? If Helen Drinan really wanted to help persons involved in sinful acts and relationships she would not be encouraging them to burden their co-workers with
the details of their sinful acts. She should know that that kind of talk belongs in the confessional.