Why Are America’s Newspapers Beingn Over-Run With Pro-Gay Arguments?
America’s newspapers, while a dying bunch, still serve an important purpose: to represent the social climate of the regions they represent. In Florida, the Miami Herald has been doing this by running editorials and op-eds about how stupid the state’s gay adoption ban is; how stupid Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is; how stupid banning gay marriage is. And this has upset reader Jerome Hurtak — so much so that he wrote in to the newspaper to complain about the Herald‘s one-sidedness. The paper’s public editor responded. With this: Yeah, and?
“Yes, I agree that the subject of gay rights deserves discussion from all sides, and so I reviewed The Herald’s editorial pages myself,” says ombudsman Edward Schumacher-Matos. “I found that since June, the paper ran seven op-ed columns supporting various gay rights, versus two that opposed. News columnist Daniel Shoer Roth, who is openly gay, wrote three more in the news pages that were sympathetic to gay causes. The pro views, for the most part, supported gay adoption of children, gay service in the military and gay marriage. The anti ones, both by Cal Thomas, rejected having gays in the military, gay marriage and the ordination of gay Episcopal bishops. Add to this two editorials in which The Herald editorial board endorsed allowing gay adoption and ending the military’s don’t ask/don’t tell policy and the balance on the pages clearly favored expanding gay rights. Is this wrong? I don’t think so. … This not to say that the newspaper should only run popular opinions. The Herald has a duty to expose readers to responsible arguments from all sides of difficult issues. They might cause opinions to change. … To be sure, the opposition to gay rights must be respected. These readers’ views are rooted in religion (though religious interpretations are changing) and in strong social and family traditions, particularly among older generations. A newspaper that is too far in front of its community will lose that community. Change is often best nudged to avoid violent cleavage, which is itself a moral imperative.”
That’s a very peaceable response to what some of us (this website?) might consider obvious: Whether the majority of Americans are in favor of LGBT equality legislation is one thing, but there is also the notion of right and wrong. Newspapers, just 50 years ago (and some even more recently), were publishing op-eds favoring separate drinking fountains for black Americans and segregated schools. We would scoff at any newspaper that did that today — but, at the time, it seemed rather … normal, if not upsetting to many. And today, we’re seeing another debate play out in newspaper pages, although some of us are more willing to acknowledge how history is being written than others. In twenty years, or thirty, the idea that we could have once advocated discriminating against a certain class of Americans will seem hateful, byzantine, and altogether foolish.
We’re just fine with thoughtful, reasoned discussions about gay rights — just as we are for similar discussions about affirmative action and abortion (those touchy subjects!). But for the same reason we’re denouncing media outlets trafficking in hateful rhetoric under the guise of “presenting the opposite side,” so too do we call bullshit on newspapers filling its pages with anti-gay arguments to maintain the appearance of objectivity.
This article is utter rubbish and borders on treachery. Not only that but I would also call it stupid and ignorant as well. To compare the newspapers call for equality akin to them advocating for separate water fountains is trully absurd. I am slowly losing my love for Queerty for working against our interests I do believe it is becoming the gay version of FOX.
Stephen Kay-youre an idiot-there, I said it for everyone
Sorry, but denying equal treatment under the law is akin to ANY denial of equal treatment in the past
Yes, Im afraid that means, sitting at the back of the bus is the same as denying equal marriage rights to gays
Denying women equal pay in the workplace is akin to denying equal rights to gays..
What do all of these have in common? yes, denial of equal treatment
Vast majority of psychologists believe orientation is not chosen so yes, comparisons to blacks and others civil rights fights is appropriate-denial of righst based on immutable characteristics
Now is not the time to back down from comparable histortical facts-just because some ignorant religious blacks resent us-too bad!!
There is, in fact, an American way, and the news is just reflecting that it is un-American to dump trained vets on the street, and to carve gays out of the nation’s laws. No taxation without representation is the founding principle of this country, and Americans are now seeing they want gays to have equality with them. A right and a wrong.
Brian En Guarde, I won’t be out of the goodness of their hearts either, but to protect that which is sacred. To hold any American’s equality as a political ransom endangers all.
I can’t believe there’s the giant typo “Beingn” in the headline to this, uncorrected all day. Embarrassing, pretty trashy.
@Norman:
Norm, you’re missing something. The article says that newspapers then advocated IN FAVOR OF segregation. Stephen Kay is pointing out that it’s a bad parallel: Segregation vs Equality. They are, in fact, the opposite.
Stephen is right. This article was stupid and borderline treachery. It’s not saying anything worth listening to, because there’s no similarity. If the article had talked about newspapers that argued AGAINST separate drinking fountains, but were unpopular, then there’s a connection with today’s advocacy in newspapers of equal and fair treatment of GLBTs. But that’s not what the article is about, and you unfairly trashed Stephen for pointing that out.
In the original article ( http://www.miamiherald.com/new.....90447.html ), Editorial Page Editor Myriam Marquez is quoted as saying: “What we run is pretty much a reflection of what this community is. It is very gay tolerant.”
This quote is key. The Miami Herald is not leading the community, or even trying to influence the community. It is following the community.
Responsible editorial boards realize that they are better educated and better informed than average people, and that they have a responsibility for leading the community of their readers. The rest of the paper is filled with journalism — following the community. The editorial page is supposed to be filled with informed opinion, not merely reporting.
It is, however, a good thing that even the papers that follow, instead of leading, are beginning to give ink to arguments in favor of equal rights for gay people. This confirms that there is motion in public opinion, and that the movement is in our favor.