The Press today highlighted Peters attack on Muslims in NZ.
Don’t for a second think I am defending Peters, I just want to comment on the media treatment.
The article includes a section entitled ‘The Press checked Winston Peter’s claims:”
His first assertion ‘the Christian faith is under direct attack from radical Islam’ is meet with the claim by the Press that this is false, because we went and asked an ‘Islamist’. A Dr. Bill Shepard, who states quite clearly that ‘the Christian faith rarely comes under direct threat from Muslims’.
Well that’s a relief to us all isn’t it?
I can’t really recall a more obvious biasis in a newspaper article (well I do remember another Press article fom a few months ago about Bush supporting homosexual marriage…). The article then treats another 4 statements of Peters in the same way.
Taking a (clearly political grandstanding, posturing) claim from Peters and refuting it by the mechanism of asking a representitive of that accused group if it’s true is instructive to me. That this sort of journalism survives in NZ is really stunning.
“So Hitler, since you have invaded half of Europe and killed 6 million Jews, do you really intend us harm?”
Do we have such a weak grasp on truth or logic in this society now?
Saying that there is no proof that there are Muslim Extremists in NZ, so therefore there aren’t any is rather ‘head in sand’ thinking. I don’t think anyone wants to see McCarthy raise his ugly head in society again, but there is a serious issue here, and it’s not about giving Peters more votes.
Hey man! You make a fantastic point. That’s terrible journalism.
I think everyone should write letters to the Dom Post complaining.
my word! are you comparing the muslims to the nazis?
It’s not like the Muslims have some written law that says they are to kill all infidels, or anything.
I am intrigued by this: Peters appears to treat ‘Christian faith’ as something which is bad to attack…