[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Boston radio's pizza connection

> > I thought Politics was not to part of this group. I get really sick of
the liberals on this board getting their little "digs" in when making
comments on Radio. The above sentence could have been written without the
words "anti-choice" without changing the meaning.
> What "should" he have said?  "Pro-life?"  That's the way the extreme right
wants to promote their position, because to them the issue of "life" is the
most important.    "Anti-choice" is the opposite of "pro-choice" which is
how the left promotes their position because
> to them, the issue of "choice" is the most important.  Either one is
acceptable IMHO.

Its a generally accepted aspect of human interactions (and I would assume
reporting),  that you call someone by the name they wish to be called.

If someone's name is S-m-y-t-h-e  and they call themselves SMITH (as in Dr.
Smith)....Thats what you call them.
If someones name is S-m-y-t-h-e and THEY refer to themselves as SMIETH (with
a long *I*)...THATS what you call them.
(And, please pardon my bad phonetic spelling!)

To call someone by a different name than what they wish to be called is
generally a poke in the eye.

> Heck, I've heard media outlets call groups that believe in choice
"pro-abortionists" even though that is inaccurate.

I have NEVER heard any media refer to that group by that title....and I am
someone who listens for the subtleties in the reporting language.  (And one
might take issue as to wether it's accurate.)  The media generally uses the
word that the pro-choice side has asked to be used when referring to
them....pro-choice. (I have rarely heard anything else used.)

> This is a hot button issue, and no matter how someone, media or otherwise,
describes your position, it will be tainted with
> some sort of bias that you may find offensive or agree with, depending on
your view.

Not necessarily.  You call each party by the name that they wish to be
called.  You report the facts.  The bias only comes thru when a reporter is
inexpereinced, doesn't understand the issues, is sloppy or carelessly lets
their bias show...in this case by poking someone in the eye with a reference
or identity that they did not want for themselves.

Reminds me of when my relatives came to Ellis Island....their name was
Rizzini...but they were just "WOPs" to the immigration people.  Again, to
not refer to someone by what they have requested to be referred to as is a
slap in the face, a poke in the eye, a sign of disrespect.

> So what if Dan said "anti-choice?"  Just because that is how he chose to
look at it does not mean he's "politicizing" this list.

It was a word chosen to 'stick it' to anyone who might be part of the
pro-life movement...and had no purpose except to express his need to extol
his own politics.


Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com