Website owner: James Miller
Wrong to know?
The following is from Thomas Sowell. Barbarians inside the Gates. pp. 22 - 24
_____________________________________________________________________________
Wrong to know?
NO RINGING PHRASE has been used more sweepingly—or more hypocritically—by the media than "the public's right to know." While journalists have repeatedly invoked this notion in defense of their own violations of individuals' privacy, public decency and the law, they have shown no such respect for this right when it comes to letting the public know things that go against political correctness.
Apparently it is wrong to know things that would upset the liberals' picture of the world — whether the particular issue involves abortion, Anita Hill, homosexuals or the homeless.
One of the things the public apparently has no right to know is what is meant by a "partial-birth abortion," despite the current controversy surrounding the issue. Nor is this something too complex for ordinary mortals to understand.
What is called a partial-birth abortion is causing a baby to be born feet first, leaving only his head just inside the mother's body. Then he is deliberately killed by puncturing his head and sucking out the brains.
Keeping the head barely inside the mother's body serves no medical purpose. Instead, it serves the legal purpose of avoiding a charge of murder. Yet the media refuse to let the public know what actually happens in a partial-birth abortion—or "late-term abortion" as the politically correct prefer to call it—however much both broadcast and print journalists are willing to discuss oral sex and other things that the public has "a right to know."
Because of media concealment of the facts, liberals can get away with saying that this is a rare procedure and may be necessary to save the mother's life, along with other demonstrably false statements. The American Medical Association has condemned the procedure as medically unnecessary and recently one of those who had claimed that the procedure was rare confessed that he had lied.
When will the media confess to lying?
Perhaps the classic example of preventing the public from knowing things considered wrong to know was the media treatment of David Brock's book, The Real Anita Hill, when it was published a few years ago. The question is not whether one agrees or disagrees with what the book says. The question is whether the public should be allowed to know what the book says.
Whether in book reviews or in interviews with the author, the media's top priority seemed to be to prevent the book's central message from becoming known—namely, that there were numerous eyewitnesses who contradicted Anita Hill's sworn testimony on numerous points and who presented a picture of her chasing Clarence Thomas and complaining to them that he showed no interest in her beyond that of an employee. Other witnesses painted a picture of Anita Hill's character that belied her picture of shocked innocence and made her someone whose credibility was very questionable.
These witnesses ranged from F.B.I. agents to Professor Hill's own students and included at least one liberal Senator. Yet the public apparently had no "right to know" what Brock's book had said and to make up their own mind about the charges and counter-charges. Reviews and interviews repeatedly turned into attacks on Brock or on those who financed his research—anything to distract from the issues raised in his book or the evidence he presented.
While the media have repeatedly quoted a study suggesting that homosexuality is inborn, they have been strangely silent after the validity of that study has been called into question and the author investigated for possible misconduct in the way he arrived at his results. The public apparently has no "right to know" that the politically correct conclusions they keep hearing may not be factually correct.
Crimes committed by "the homeless" are also among the things that it seems to be wrong to know. These crimes, including vicious murders, are almost always attributed to someone described as "a drifter"—even though he might have been called one of "the homeless" before his foul deed caused him to be reclassified, in the interest of saving the image of those on the streets, towards whom the media wants us to feel generous or guilty.
Whatever one's views about abortion, Anita Hill, homosexuals, the homeless or a thousand other things, these views can be informed only if information is not suppressed by those whose business is to supply information rather than try to control public opinion through disinformation. If they insist on being propagandists instead of journalists, the public surely has a right to know that.
_____________________________________________________________________________
2 June 2024
Jesus Christ and His Teachings
Way of enlightenment, wisdom, and understanding
America, a corrupt, depraved, shameless country
On integrity and the lack of it
The test of a person's Christianity is what he is
Ninety five percent of the problems that most people have come from personal foolishness
Liberalism, socialism and the modern welfare state
The desire to harm, a motivation for conduct
On Self-sufficient Country Living, Homesteading
Topically Arranged Proverbs, Precepts, Quotations. Common Sayings. Poor Richard's Almanac.
Theory on the Formation of Character
People are like radio tuners --- they pick out and listen to one wavelength and ignore the rest
Cause of Character Traits --- According to Aristotle
We are what we eat --- living under the discipline of a diet
Avoiding problems and trouble in life
Role of habit in formation of character
Personal attributes of the true Christian
What determines a person's character?
Love of God and love of virtue are closely united
Intellectual disparities among people and the power in good habits
Tools of Satan. Tactics and Tricks used by the Devil.
The Natural Way -- The Unnatural Way
Wisdom, Reason and Virtue are closely related
Knowledge is one thing, wisdom is another
My views on Christianity in America
The most important thing in life is understanding
We are all examples --- for good or for bad
Television --- spiritual poison
The Prime Mover that decides "What We Are"
Where do our outlooks, attitudes and values come from?
Sin is serious business. The punishment for it is real. Hell is real.
Self-imposed discipline and regimentation
Achieving happiness in life --- a matter of the right strategies
Self-control, self-restraint, self-discipline basic to so much in life