August 6, 2004
Dear All Things Considered:
I was surprised by Mary Louise Kelly's report on al Qaida and the U.S. elections today.
Let me see if I've got this right:
Ms. Kelly passed along without question the claim by neoconservative hawk and Iran-Contra alumnus Michael Ledeen that "al Qaida leaders would like to see a President Kerry," and yet the best she could come up with by way of "balance" was someone who was "not so sure" that a vote for Kerry was somehow a vote for the terrorists? No one disagreed? No one thought it was baseless political slander--but you did manage to find one person who was "not so sure"?
If Ms. Kelly really believes that the al Qaida terrorists are rooting for Kerry, rather than simply seeking to create the maximum disruption of any sort, she should report that, and not just drop sly hints. If she doesn't--if, for example, she believes that parroting that kind of cheap partisan smear is utterly irresponsible--then what was it doing in her report in the first place?
Come on, ATC--if your listeners wanted casual political hatchet jobs masquerading as legitimate reporting, we'd be watching cable television right now.
No comments:
Post a Comment