BAR wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
Crazy idea: Write to the paper and ask why they don't include the
word "Democrat" in articles about Spitzer. You're guessing the
reasons. I suspect they assume (correctly) that smart people already
know Spitzer's party affiliation, and smart people (who have a life)
realize it doesn't matter at all. But, you could find out for sure.

http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/...45 8252&rfi=6



You claim to be a smart guy. When you read an article about a
Governor involved with prostitutes and the Governor's political party
affiliation is not provided in the article you can only come to one
conclusion.

It's all about consistency and fairness. Either you provided the
political party affiliation for all elected officials or for no
elected officials. Providing political party affiliation for some and
not others shows bias.


Think about articles you're seeing about Spitzer TODAY. Not yesterday
or the day before. ***TODAY***

Now, tell me why mentioning his party affiliation TODAY adds any
meaningful content. I'm the journalism professor, you're the student.
Why would you include that information TODAY, knowing that it had
already been mentioned plenty in prior days.

Either you are consistent and you identify the political party
affiliation of everyone or no one. The fact that his name has been in
the news quite a bit lately and we can forgo identificaiton isn't in any
of the style guides.


Hmmm. "George W. Bush, the lying, incompetent and dumb *Republican*
POTUS..."

Yeah, that works.