Baiting the bear

The Fraters Libertas can’t resist, even when the bear in question is busily soiling itself again:

…never underestimate the power of an MSM internal watchdog to pardon the unpardonable. And in Platt’s column I recognized the familiar style of the Star Tribune’s so called “Reader Representative” Kate Parry. That style, outlined and excerpted for your pleasure:

1) Cop to a lesser charge:

It’s not a monumental goof… We dropped a plate here; we didn’t smash the china cabinet. Though the editor’s personal sensibilities are to be admired, this time they did not serve the readers, or the newspaper, or journalism

2) Question and belittle the motives of the readers pointing out the error:

but it’s [an error] that fuels suspicions some readers have about the news media in general and this newspaper in particular. Also, his couching of the mayor’s statements made the newspaper a target for familiar broadsides of bias. In trying to address potential sensitivities of some readers by excising the controversial remark, it could be taken by other readers — and believe me, it was — that the newspaper was trying to cover or protect this particular public official from his own articulations.

3) Mention how hard it is to work at a newspaper and characterize those who made the error as the real heroes of the story.

One more thing about copy editors: They are the mostly unsung heroes and heroines of daily journalism. They spin a lot of important plates in a very short amount of time, and on deadline to boot. Theirs is a difficult job and their efforts go mostly unnoticed when they do the job right, and keep all those plates spinning — which is most of the time.

Always remember, these are the same people who insist that blogs and the Internet media can’t be taken seriously because they lack editors – you know, the same gatekeepers who are too busy making the words of black politicians look more palatable and protecting the editorial pages from dangerous thinking to actually verify the accuracy of the news that the newspaper is reporting.

Their self-aggrandizing apologies are disingenuous, too. For example, the 611 errors reported by the Star & Sickle’s omsbudswoman won’t include the many ludicrous predictions which are always carefully shielded by the word “could”. Sure, a carry law COULD cause the streets of Minneapolis to run red with blood, just as it COULD cause them to run green with blood as the armed citizenry defends itself against saber-toothed aliens from the planet Wumpus. Of course, the fact that the chances of the former actually happening aren’t much higher than the latter – or that it didn’t come to pass – never seems to find its way into print.