So today, I read a story that reports ABC news will be broadcasting World News from the Blue Room of the White House. Word is that President Obama and White House officials will be pushing for a new government-run health care program. According to Drudge Report, this primetime special called "Prescription for America" has ignited an "ethical firestorm" due to the exclusion of opposing voices (visit http://www.drudgereport.com/ to read the entire story).
My question is simple: why the ethical firestorm? ABC is a private company whose directors have obviously chosen to go ahead with this project. Those board members didn't have their arms twisted or a knife to their throats - its about ratings. The president is the biggest draw on television - a reality rockstar that people want to see, so it comes as no surprise to this snake. The subject matter of the primetime special is neither here nor there. Republicans, who are oddly enough, generally opposed to the President's plan, are the main voice of opposition to ABC's decision and have been the first to voice their displeasure.
Let me make this clear: ABC news has no obligation or duty to report on both sides (support v. opposition) of this debate. Fox News, for example, is a blatantly conservative news conduit and only rarely presents opinions contrary to the ideology of the company. We never hear about the "ethical firestorm" generated by marching the Wicked Witch of the West (Ann Coulter) or the Dark Overlord of the Universe (Bill O'Reilley) out to spew their slanted venom.
I'm not taking sides here, and I haven't yet decided whether or not I personally support the President's health care reform plan, but this special will help me, and millions of other Americans, do just that. If the opposition wants equal time, let them go to Fox and ask for it. I'm sure Fox would jump at the opportunity.
Now for the philosophical question: Does ABC news have a duty or obligation to present both sides of the debate on the President's health care plan? If so, why?
Thanks for your opinions everyone. and don't forget to cast your vote in the MBTS (Marlon Brando The Snake) Poll!
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Mansfield Flag Controversy
So a woman in a Texas hospital hangs an American Flag in her shared office workspace. One of her office-mates was offended by this act and asked the hospital to have the flag removed. After a huge public backlash, the hospital agreed to let this woman hang her flag. Was the request to remove the flag so outlandish? There's a flag flying in front of the hospital - is that not enough? Why should another worker, one who is, for one reason or another, offended by the presence of the flag in his or her office, be forced to live with it?
Clearly, my opinion on the matter is that no person should be subjected to any kind of undue discrimination in a place of employment. If McLucas (the woman who hung the flag) had a private office, then by all means, she has every right to hang her flag. This is, however, a shared workspace. How would she feel is a Saudi or Lebanese chose to hang his or her respective flag in that same space. Would McLucas mind? Would passers-by notice? Would others be offended? Most certainly someone would have a problem. The hosptial was right to ask McLucas to remove her flag and acted responsibly in doing so.
My problem is this - McLucas is the mother of a soldier who is currently fighting in Iraq. Understandably, she wants to support her daughter and all of the others fighting for our country. However, when that support infringes on the right to a non-hostile workplace of another, said support should be removed from the work atmosphere. As I said, the hospital was correct to ask her to remove the flag, but recanted after being the target of unmeasurable public scrutiny and criticism. Were someone to display a statue of Buddha (or any other religious icon, for example) in his or her shared workspace, would that person be asked to remove the statue? Save your breath - hell yes!
The questions I'm asking are simple:
1) Does McLucas' affiliation with the armed forces make her privileged (in the sense that she is being held to a different standard than others)?
2) If so, why is that privilege justified?
3) If not, why did the hospital allow her to hang her flag when all was said and done?
Here's a link to the story: http://cbs11tv.com/local/patriotism.at.office.2.1020415.html
Please, I'd like to get some feedback because I'm having trouble understanding why this woman would be allowed to offend another person in her place of employment! Don't forget to vote for your opinion in the box to the right.
Clearly, my opinion on the matter is that no person should be subjected to any kind of undue discrimination in a place of employment. If McLucas (the woman who hung the flag) had a private office, then by all means, she has every right to hang her flag. This is, however, a shared workspace. How would she feel is a Saudi or Lebanese chose to hang his or her respective flag in that same space. Would McLucas mind? Would passers-by notice? Would others be offended? Most certainly someone would have a problem. The hosptial was right to ask McLucas to remove her flag and acted responsibly in doing so.
My problem is this - McLucas is the mother of a soldier who is currently fighting in Iraq. Understandably, she wants to support her daughter and all of the others fighting for our country. However, when that support infringes on the right to a non-hostile workplace of another, said support should be removed from the work atmosphere. As I said, the hospital was correct to ask her to remove the flag, but recanted after being the target of unmeasurable public scrutiny and criticism. Were someone to display a statue of Buddha (or any other religious icon, for example) in his or her shared workspace, would that person be asked to remove the statue? Save your breath - hell yes!
The questions I'm asking are simple:
1) Does McLucas' affiliation with the armed forces make her privileged (in the sense that she is being held to a different standard than others)?
2) If so, why is that privilege justified?
3) If not, why did the hospital allow her to hang her flag when all was said and done?
Here's a link to the story: http://cbs11tv.com/local/patriotism.at.office.2.1020415.html
Please, I'd like to get some feedback because I'm having trouble understanding why this woman would be allowed to offend another person in her place of employment! Don't forget to vote for your opinion in the box to the right.
Introduction
Greetings out there everyone! I'm Marlon Brando, and yes, I'm a snake. I'm a Ball Python born, bred, and raised right here in the USA.
I consider myself a bit of a philosopher, but my interests span everything from religion and spirituality to the foggy realms of politics. Be prepared, however, because I'm an outspoken liberal and Democrat with an attitude. I do, however, welcome different points of view and appreciate opinions contrary to my own...however wrong those opinions might be (and yes, there is such a thing as an incorrect opinion).
So welcome everyone, to "Slither Me Timbers" - perhaps the only place where I can publicize my views without fear of retribution from those who have spent eons demonizing, fearing, and even consuming my kind.
Enjoy!
I consider myself a bit of a philosopher, but my interests span everything from religion and spirituality to the foggy realms of politics. Be prepared, however, because I'm an outspoken liberal and Democrat with an attitude. I do, however, welcome different points of view and appreciate opinions contrary to my own...however wrong those opinions might be (and yes, there is such a thing as an incorrect opinion).
So welcome everyone, to "Slither Me Timbers" - perhaps the only place where I can publicize my views without fear of retribution from those who have spent eons demonizing, fearing, and even consuming my kind.
Enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
