There's two interesting points you can talk about on this one.
First, watch the video HERE. It runs a few minutes.
So, a mom -- who happens to be the #2 person at J.Crew -- is coloring her boys toenails pink. Is this right, or wrong, in your opinion?
The video, around the 1:23 mark, mentions a counter response blog from Dr. David Ablow, a sometime contributor to Fox News. It's linked to in the story, but you can read it HERE.
Two things struck me about this article. One was the story itself. Is this pushing the edge of gender identity too far? Do you think we should leave things well enough alone, or have we not gone far enough? Does this even matter at all, or is this a tempest-in-a-teacup (much ado about nothing)?
The second thing that hit me was the angle of reporting itself. Did The Lookout even bother to take an even view of the situation, or did they completely cherry pick their interviews (and resultant points of view) in this article? And something else of note: at the end of the interview, Robin Roberts actually makes a comment stating that she knows the J.Crew executive featured in the ad, and vouches for her. Is this something a journalist should do (despite the fluff-show format, Roberts has won awards for her journalism and is considered a quality reporter)? Which leads me to the second point: should we accept journalistic bias in the reporting we consume? Regardless of point of view, does this "positioning" of the story hurt or harm the discussion of the points? (shades of Gerard Alexander here -- does this relate?)
Discuss either point at the usual length -- 300-500 words.
I am going to take the neutral stance in saying that what the mother did to her child is neither right nor wrong. I believe that there is no way that painting a kids toenails is going to turn them into a transsexual or make them gay, that is complete Bullsh*t. It is a well-known fact that the reason both scientists and psychologists believe that children grow up to be gay is wired into their brain from birth. Yeah I think it seems a little strange that this mom decided it would be a good idea to paint her son's toenails and use it for an advertisement but in reality, that is her child. The kid obviously didn't say no to her since he looked pretty happy in the picture and sparking up a controversy over this entire issue is just stupid. If this kid grows up to be gay, people are going to blame the mother and this picture for what happened to him but the truth is, it is nothing that outside forces can control, and it is the child's body to do with what he pleases. The reason that people become transsexual is because they feel like the opposite gender trapped in the wrong body, regardless of how they grew up. There are gay parents in some states who adopt children and they turn out perfectly fine, this is essentially a nature vs. nurture debate and I am going to have to side with mother nature on this one. If the kid likes pink, and likes his mommy painting his toenails, let them do what they please, regardless of the mother's status.
ReplyDelete-David Hacker
I think people always make things bigger than what it really is. Like in the video when the mother that was interviewed said if it was a girl playing in mud with trucks people wouldn't have much to say. I totally agree with her!
ReplyDeletePeople always have to find ways to make a big deal out of things. That's always how United States has been. Maybe they should focus more of that attention on the economy and the what's going on with the USA instead of a mother painting her kids toenails in a magazine. It was made to be a fun photo from what I can tell and it just takes one person to turn it into something totally different. Kids are always doing silly things. I recently just heard of a friend's nephew running around in his mother's high heels and in that same conversation my mother said her nephew that is now married with his own kid used to do that too. Both in different generations and everything. It doesn't have to do with how the kid will turn out such as gay or transsexual. There not old enough to know any better and only thing that's on there mind is what is new and fun to play with today.
Now if this was different and the kid was older and putting on nail polish then I might start to wonder. I even see my little girl cousin being dressed in cute camo outflits, but does that mean she's going to start dressing like a boy and act like one? I highly doubt it. I like how this photo got this much attention over something so small, but then it makes me worried with how quick Americans are to judge anything out of the ordinary. It's 2011 and things are GOING to change and people need to get over it. There's new generations taking place everyday and tons of little boy's we don't even know about putting on pink nail polish just for something different.
Everything in this article seems to be poorly conducted, including the behavior and mocking comments of others. Everything is blown out of proportion. Kids will be kids. If adults want to argue that nail polish will make a boy gay, then they had better argue that children pretending to be airplanes will turn them into Transformers. Kids do stupid things. I never matched my clothes when I was younger, but I’m fairly sure I figured out what goes together and what doesn’t.
ReplyDeleteI’m not saying I disagree with what the mother does; if she wants to paint his nails, then power to her. However, no one is naïve enough to not expect negative feedback; when the mother put this in the magazine, she knew what she was doing. However, I feel that if her intention was to make a statement about unfair gender roles, it would have been better executed in a different magazine, in a separate way and not in a clothes catalogue where people who can actually change attitudes are reading the National Geographic or the New York Times.
I understand Roberts was trying to lighten the situation, but casual comments are never effective, or professional on the air. She’s basically saying, “I know her, so her behavior is okay.” She doesn’t have any credentials, except for her opinion. The video and the article were about as convincing as Roberts’ support of her friend. The whole thing was like a smorgasbord of gossip and bias that were in no way relevant or beneficial to the viewer. How is the therapist’s snarky remark helpful to the news story? All it does is publicly humiliate the mom. And for what reason? It’s okay to dress up like a girl for Halloween, paint your nails, and play with dolls. Children are learning. Let them explore for themselves!
Overall, this news story was a typical battle of men versus women with two opposing views. The story was uncomfortable because it was just a bunch of negative interviews thrown together and discussed in an unconstructive light. Journalistic bias is typical. Viewers need to have the skills to recognize it and determine their interpretation of the message for themselves.
-Stouffer
I personally don’t see anything wrong with this little boy having pink toenails as long as he is not being forced to do it. I do think that it could have a negative impact on him because of the level of intolerance in this country and that fact the children are not always the nicest people. Having pink toenails could get this boy made fun of at school and may have an effect on the amount of male friends he has. I could also be wrong about this because he is five and I very much doubt I would have cared about something like that when I was that age and I still wouldn't as long as it was voluntary and the kid did not stain any of my furniture. I would also like it if he kept the stink of nail polish out of my house. I don’t think that this should have been a newsworthy add I couldn't care less if some rich lady painted her rich sons toenails. I also think it is offensive that the second article was talking about tattooing or bleaching skin. This has noting to do with painted toenail or the decreasing gender lines in our country. There is always going to be different races and race mixing just like there is two genders and everything in the middle. I just think that these articles are an example of the disgusting sensational media in our country. If anyone cares about this kids toenail they clearly don’t have enough to do with their life. I have not tolerance for articles like this it is just as bad as the celebrity news. I don’t care about what famous rich people are doing and I relay don’t care about this kids feet. He is not my kid and I don’t know him or his family. Why should I care? I don’t think journalistic bias is the issue hear I think it is the sad shape our media has been in for years now and the absolutely ridiculous things that they deem newsworthy.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching the video I believe that this ad is perfectly acceptable. Although the boy is getting his toenails painted this does not mean he keeps them painted after the photo shoot or is constantly wearing girl clothes or pink outfits. She simply wanted to create this ad probably from an idea that popped into her head at the time. I think the picture is really cute and the way he is laughing makes it seem like he was having a lot of fun, which also adds excitement. After looking at this ad I would not think it would stir up a huge controversy and lead others to believe this kid is homosexual or is going to have some serious problems down the road. I would simply think that it is a cute picture yet also a little intriguing and move on. To relate this story with a personal experience, I would go back to the days when my younger brother was a little kid and I would paint his nails. Painting his nails was simply out of fun and sometimes he would get mad but most of the time he did not even realize what I was doing. In no way did he think it was too girly and in no way did I think he would have serious problems down the road. I was right, he is not homosexual and he does not have any psychological needs. Overall I am shocked to see such a controversy evolve after this ad and I wish it had turned out a different way.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article that followed the video, I was appalled to hear some of his comments. Although it does seem today that gender identity has fallen by the way side to a certain extent, I believe this ad is not so much relatable. Nowadays it is normal to see gay marriage and for girls to wear boyish clothing or the other way around. I am accepting of what others want to do even though I might not follow the same path. However this ad did not strike me as an example of how our world is changing. I did not look at it and go “wow, what is our world coming to, I am ashamed” Instead I thought of a boy having fun with his mother and enjoying his young life. I believe he took the gender identity way too far and his article seemed very vulgar.
The entire article made me laugh quite. I must say this is completely blown out of proportion. I don't think there is anything wrong with a mom painting her son's toenails pink, although it is a bit feminine. Being the youngest child, I was used to having to deal with my older siblings picking on me and I guess, generally treating me like the runt of the litter. On one occasion my sister even trapped me inside a clothes hamper and refused to let me out unless she could put makeup on me. As mortifying as that experience was, I feel it had no effect on my masculinity or my sexuality, it was just very embarrassing, and a funny story that they use to make fun of me every now and then. I think Keith Ablow is just a bit too worried about gender roles in our society. Painting a kid's toenails pink doesn't necessarily turn a child gay, and quite frankly, even if it does, Keith Ablow shouldn't be too concerned about it. If I remember correctly, weren't there gay and lesbian people throughout history? I can go on a limb and say yes, there was. But with the advent of the internet, now we can discuss topics like this one. Gender Identity is a difficult topic to talk about, and quite frankly he is taking too conservative of a stance on this topic. People are strange creatures, with different opinions and viewpoints and different chemical balances in their brain. Who am I to criticize someone on the gender they identified themselves as, regardless of it being their natural born state. It would be like me arguing with someone who likes anchovies on their pizza instead of pepperoni, except it would be sensitive of an issue. Ablow even went as far to state that, "Yeah, well, it may be fun and games now, Jenna, but at least put some money aside for psychotherapy for the kid—and maybe a little for others who’ll be affected by your “innocent” pleasure." I think Ablow should be ashamed for expressing such ignorance. I should maybe put some money aside for psychotherapy for myself after being exposed to the ideas of a bald-headed ignoramus who's being controlled by a neo-conservative hand up his rear end. That last comment might be a bit too insensitive, but this is the internet baby! I can say whatever outrageous comments I want, with little to no legal ramifications! And as for Robin Roberts comment on the J. Crew executive, I feel that it only slightly hurt the story, because it ended on her opinion of the J. Crew executive. The whole story was filled with soundbites of other people's opinions however, so it didn't seem too out of place. I suppose Dr. Keith Ablow and Robin Roberts both are allowed and protected to have the freedom to say whatever it is they may say, but sometimes some people, Ablow, need to learn when to pipe down!
ReplyDelete-m. labyk
To be honest, this topic is just completely blown out of proportion. It does not really matter to me if a mom paints her son's toenails, because if this was a normal person it would have never even surfaced. Gender identity is something that is commonly seen with new born children because other than what color they wear it is impossible to tell the gender of the child. I do not feel like it is my place to say whether it is right or wrong for a mother to do this to her child. I know in my family if this would have happened it would have ended up being a joke between the family. Why should people be so concerned with what this woman did to her son? It's not like she was abusing him or ignoring the child to the point where he is experiencing malnutrition. It seems like people will just continue to blow small little things like this out of the water. There is no need for people to be in the woman's business at all. As for the reporter giving her personal view on the mother, it is just like reading any other piece of information put out there, in the sense that it is her opinion. It is not necessarily right or wrong of her to do this because it is her choice to have her point of view be seen. I can say that it is absurd to paint a boy's toenails, but that is nothing more than an opinion. Everyone has opinion's, and some people just voice theirs. I would not say that her voicing her opinion hurt the discussion points because of the fact that everyone will have their own opinions. All in all, I feel like people should just stop really caring about this because it happened, and who are you to judge whether it is right or wrong?
ReplyDeleteMedia images often convey gender expectations. This time I think the media along with the Dr. David was making a fuss of it. I cannot believe that the story was made headline news in American to be honest. It shows again that society is not encouraging choosing gender identity. It is a long way to get rid of their gender stereotypes. Some characteristics generally associated with males in society are imposed too strongly—masculine, tough, resolute. Even displaying your clothes, hairstyles, makeup of the opposite gender is considered inappropriate. You cannot turn a five-year-old boy into gay or bisexual or transgendered merely by the not pink toe nail. The kids are naturally curious and want to imitate adults, and their love for color is easy to understand. The psychologist is too nervous and his fear is funny and ridiculous to me. Children learn much about gender roles from their parents, whether they are taught consciously or unconsciously. Parents may but not necessarily model roles and reinforce expectations of “appropriate behavior”, and children may also internalize messages from available cultural influences and materials around them, such as pink stands for somewhat feminine color. However, I think the media pushed gender identities too far. The mother in the ad did nothing wrong. I know a lot of boys who are painted red nail polish and dressed as girls in their kindergarten years, but most of them become masculine and live up to the cultural expectations to them. Children develop self-concepts based on social feedback—the looking-glass self and the role taking. My cousin played with me and my dolls, and there's an interesting photo of him in a dress from one fateful day of playtime, and there was probably make up involved too. It was really quality time back then. He is heterosexual and he is married now. Moreover, even the boy is a gender queer when he grows up he shouldn’t be blame or his mother. This news’s prejudice is so evident probably because it wants to impose the gender expectations. Why is that everything need to be so black and white?
ReplyDeleteI don't think it's wrong or right to paint a boy's toenails, I painted my friends last week, but where the articles go with this issue is another thing completely. Keith's article was very extreme in connecting this issue with becoming gay, needing therapy, and depleting out gender roles to the point where people don't have a drive to nurture children. Children being born in our society today are going to have to deal with, and have easy access to alot of things that are going to bombard their sexuality and gender. The media makes sure that all the bases are covered. When it comes down to it, it's the person's own path to find out what their "roles" are. In the end, pink toenails are not going to change what he feels in his/her heart.
ReplyDeleteThe other issue with this is that they seem to be doing it on purpose, because this is afterall an ad, not a family photo. Using one's children to sell anything, whether it be clothes or views on gender roles is wrong in my book. Children are innocent, and even if they may not be harmed or changes too much in the long run from something like this, it's still wrong to put them into a position for our ideas, beliefs or profit. Let's not hand our children picket signs, and let's not make them do tricks for money.
I think the whole issue of the J. Crew is ridiculous. It’s a little silly that she would be doing this in an advertisement, but who cares if a mother wants to paint a little boy’s toenails. Clearly this is nothing more than an attempt argue over nothing. There was no underlying motive of the advertisement. The comment that Erin Brown made about this advertisement being an attempt at “liberal transgender politics” because Michelle Obama loves J. Crew is just humorous. Who puts that much thought into something with so little meaning behind it. I would also like to whole heartedly agree with the idea that if it were a little girl playing in mud it would have caused no attention. When children are at the age of five gender specific activities are still iffy. I played all kinds of sports when I was younger; I was the definition of a tom boy and that was completely normal. There was an incident I remember when my brother wanted my mom to paint his nails and my dad came home and was angry about it. Zack, my brother, wanted his toes painted! It’s not like he, or the little boy in the J. Crew ad, was old enough to realize painting nails is for girls. It’s just another way to express creativity, and who can deny a child that. And is there really a question as to if this boy will become transgender because his mother painted his nails? It’s funny that people still think like this.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, I don’t think this type of journalistic bias is necessarily bad. People will think what they will about this situation regardless of what the journalist says. You can tell from the advertisement itself that the boy was super excited to be with his mother. The picture’s adorable, I don’t think Jenna Lyons needs to be vouched for at all. If people don’t agree with the ad and it’s really that big of an issue to them, then don’t buy clothes from there. It’s as simple as that. This was made into a way bigger deal then it needed to be but also did give J. Crew a lot of free advertisement just because everyone was talking about it, so I guess it didn’t work out too bad.
I feel that this article is pushing gender roles too far. I think it was something that was intended to promote J.Crew clothing, not gender role issues. However, our society is so prone to what is right or wrong for girls and boys to do of coarse they notice. I do not think that this was not the main focus of the commercial and that journalism is not going too far in this case. There was by no means a bias shown against the gender roles. Granted, there are some journalists who chose to publish pieces that are very bias and one sided, but that is not the issue here. Our society has such a specific picture of what little boys and girls should do and how they should act. Little girls should play with dolls, make up, and hopscotch while little boys play sports and play aggressively. However, I was one of those little kids who would play outside every day and loved coming in covered in mud at the end of the night. I would dress girly when I had to.. but when it was my choice I was always wearing a baseball t shirt with shorts. You would never be able to tell now that I was such a tomboy and I turned out perfectly fine. I feel like with girls, if they want to do things boys like its accepted and they are simply labeled as a tomboy, however when little boys do things that only girls are supposed to, they are gay. I feel like there is a huge bias within the gender roles in our society. But who makes and decides what is right and wrong for children to partake them to meet the criteria for gender roles, or proclaim them gay or straight? There is no set rule that says gender roles matter. I think the pitfall of this commercial was the fact that a child was used at all. The whole conflict could have been avoided, and there would be no gender role discrepancy. However, it makes sense that he was used because it was supposed to be making a connection to family life. The bottom line is that no one is entitled to tell others what is right and wrong when it comes to gender roles because we are all different and all have separate opinions on what is acceptable for boys and girls to do in our society today.
ReplyDelete-Kaitlyn Huml
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis whole argument was so stupid. Who cares if a little boy has pink toenails? Really? Just because of that they say he'll be gay. Okay so that's like saying that because my brother plays dolls with his little five-year-old cousins who are girls, he's going to be gay. No that's not it at all. He does it because he's curious and he loves to make them laugh and be involved with them.
ReplyDeleteLittle boys like to do what mommy does. My brother loved to come in my room when he was little and watch me put on make-up, he loved to be around me and my mom. He was so curious and such a funny little guy and it's the same with girls. I was always around my dad, playing soccer, baseball football, does that mean I'm going to be a lesbian? I mean this is just stupid and it honestly made me upset that they blew this totally out of proportion.
I definately agree that if a girl were playing in the mud with trucks they would not have said a thing. And why is that? Boys and girls can play with trucks. They're little kids and they don't know better. You can see in that picture that the little boy was having so much fun with his mom getting his toenails painted bright neon pink. It's so much fun to be silly with kids and that little boy had not a care in the world what others would say. He's a kid.
I don't understand why that pyschologist had such a huge problem and made such a big deal from nothing. Just because she painted his nails. He totally bashed her and it wasn't right to do. But I can respect his point of view. But to make such a huge fuss over this is just silly. You could definatly tell he was upset by this but people can do what they want. It's a free country and people can express themselves however they want.
For example, he said something about people tattooing themselves all over and saying they're African Americans. I'm sure there are people who might do that, but that's their choice and nobody can say anything about that. You can have your opinion and that's fine, but you shouldn't make people feel bad or belittle them because you are a different person than they are.
It's a kid, get over it. He's not gonna turn out gay because his mother painted his toenails neon pink. Boys play with dolls, girls play with trucks because they're curious. It's normal.
I do not think that painting the toes of a young boy would really effect his mental well being later in life. Being gay does not mean you choose to be on a certain side of colors. The whole pink for girls and blue for boys is actually an early marketing tactic started by the children clothing companies early in 20th century. So the idea of boys only wearing blue and only girls can wear pink is ridiculous. I do think if you raised a child to believe that they were a different sex than they were, that would be a different story because that would be pushing them to believe something else. I just thought it was simple fun, no big deal and society needs to calm down with the backlash. I think so many people do not understand really how sexuality works sometimes. Placing certain gender labels on specific actions does not do any good for us. I do not think the ad was placed there to ruffle any feathers out in the media, but there is still a large group out in the media circuit that still believe that old style of thinking with genders. I hope our society will grow out of this kind of thought phase, it will only hold us back even more.
ReplyDeleteI think that there making a bigger deal out of this then it really is. Who in their right mind would believe painting pink toenail polish would turn the kid gay. I got a nephew that is four and his older sisters dress him up i mean there’s nothing wrong with that there just playing around. But I do agree that at some point you should make it know what guys due and what girls due, I don’t know when that age cut off is but I do believe there is a certain point where you explain to your kids why they should do that or why they should. I personally think that its ultimately the parents decision if she ok with what her kids do then why should it be anyone else’s problem. Kids go through stages all the way up till they get out of high school, I mean reading this I’m sure you can think of a time where you went through a stage in life and now your think why the hell did I do that. The article over all was very one sided and to me I don’t think the author put any thought into the whole situation, he just went straight to the point a basically said that she was teaching her kid to become gay. And last I think it was right for Robin to vouch from the J.Crew executive because I don’t think the lady did nothing wrong at all, that’s like if a dad was saving and a little girl asks if she could do it to and the dad put shaving cream on her face and gives her a comb to act like she is shaving, the little girl thinks it’s something fun to do. But then you got guy like this doctor that make it his job to point out how bad a parent someone is.
ReplyDelete-Stephen Streets
I think that this is an excellent example of how ingrained gender roles are in our society. Boys are supposed to play with trucks and wear blue and girls are supposed to play house and wear pick, according to the norms of our society. And as is the case when boundaries are pushed or people go against the norm there is conflict. I think that this was bound to cause people to get angry and upset, but I think that it is silly. Who cares if someone else’s child has pink toe nails? How does this affect anyone else? I understand it was made public through a magazine, but honestly I feel like this is an example of people who need to have more things to consume their time with. I also think that this is a good example of the bias in journalism. Because she comes out and says she knows the person, and defends her so you know she is going to bias in presenting the story. To me this isn’t as bad as when you think the story isn’t bias when it probably has some form of bias because nobody is perfect and it is bound to happen. But, when you know how the writer feels and how they are bias it is easy to take what they say with a grain of salt. Think most times people don’t look for the biases that may exist and I think that needs to be paid attention to. I don’t think journalist should let their biases get in the way but, I accept that they do in varying degrees. Which is why I look at multiple news sources and usually both liberal and conservative sources of news and recommend that others do the same, because bias stories are going to happen
ReplyDeleteAfter watching this video and reading the article I must say that I think the mother is wrong for painting her sons finger nails. I think that doing something like that to a kid continually will have an effect on him in the future. Now if the mother only painted her sons toe nails every once in awhile just for the heck of it than that wouldn’t be that big of a deal because the kid probably won’t remember it later on in life. I don’t think that painting nails has anything to do with gender identity. I could paint my nails right now and that wouldn’t make me any less of a man or make me question my gender. It might make other people question my gender identity but only stupid judgmental people who have nothing better to do but judge other people over something so stupid as painted nails. I don’t think the Lookout was cherry picking their interviews I feel like they included people with different point of views people who thought it was gay people who thought it wasn’t a big deal. I know that at the end of the interview, Robin Roberts actually makes a comment stating that she knows the J.Crew executive featured in the ad, and vouches for her. I don’t think this is something a journalist should do. I think that there should be no bias in her report. She should just report the news and keep her friendship with whoever she’s talking about to herself. However I don’t feel like this bias had too much of an effect on the story. I feel like whoever’s watching the report is going to think the same of it regardless of the friendship the reporter has with the person she’s talking about even if it is J.Crew
ReplyDeleteI found this article very interesting and agreed with some of the point brought up. The photo seems innocent at first but when you actually think about it combined with the quote it does stir up some of negative thoughts towards it. I definitely think the article from Fox was over exaggerated in a lot of aspects but he brought up some reasonable points. Our childhood is a time where we often struggle with identity. Simply painting the nails of a little boy pink probably isn’t going to cause and future psychological issues or gender identification issues. It’s common for children to even play the role of the other gender while playing, but that doesn’t mean they actually think they are the other gender. I do believe however that if the little boy was continually given mixed ideas about gender identification it could cause some problems in the future. If it’s the little boy’s own will to have his nails painted why should we say it’s wrong? It looks more to me like a mother playing and bonding with her child, they look like they’re just having playful fun, not changing the boy’s gender role. I personally don’t think it’s particularly great to have the picture in an advertisement though, it seems out of place for an ad for a clothing catalog. I guess I'm neutral on the topic.
ReplyDelete-DylanPalchesko
I think that Jenna painting her son’s toenails neon pink is not pushing the edge of gender identity too far. I guess I will continue to feel this way until research shows that over a human’s life span this can be proven true. Different people parent different ways and there is always someone in this world that is not going to agree with a certain parenting technique. Maybe the boy will grow into a very open minded adult by Jenna openly painting his toenails. I really do not see the harm in it at all from experience. I am the older than my brother so growing up I was a little dominant. I will always remember the time I was painting his fingernails different shades of pastel colors for my mother for Easter. I also used to put makeup on him sometimes. Kids do crazy things and today there is absolutely no gender crisis in my brother’s life at all. He seems to be totally unaffected by this. I think people should just leave Jenna alone and let her parent her child as she pleases. It isn’t like she is pushing him to think like a girl.
ReplyDeleteAs for the comment from the video about girls playing with trucks in the mud, I used to do that when I was young. My brother had a huge collection of hot wheels and was always getting a new car to play with. Since he was the only kid in the house I could play with I decided to have my own collection of cars, just a little bit smaller. Now that I am an adult I definitely do NOT see a gender identity problem in my life. I am perfectly fine.
I do not think we should accept journalistic bias in the reporting we consume daily. What can you really do about this besides not listen? Bias can be found through all types of media: magazines, newspapers, television stations, radios, etc. I believe that no matter how you get your daily news that the person or people reporting it to you already have set up a way to position the story to make you think a certain way. Some do it on purpose and others probably do it without even noticing because it has been a part of journalism for so long.
-C.Lough