Talk about a blatant attempt to mislead with a headline! We have no better example of such an effort than one by the AP today. It is a textbook case of a headline that does not fit the facts of the story.
Here is the headline:
R.I. to recognize gay unions performed in Mass.
Wow! It would be big news, indeed, if legislation had been passed wherein Gay Unions from Massachusetts were to be officially recognized by Rhode Island. And, if one were to read this AP headline and move on, one would be left with the impression that it had. Even the sub head doesn't really tell the whole truth.
State’s attorney general says there’s no reason to deny them recognition
But upon reading the story it is revealed that there has been no ruling, no law, and no such recognition of Mass. Gay Unions by Rhode Island at all. Instead, it was just the empty words of Rhode Island's Attorney General. Just his speculation that it could happen if the issue were to be pressed.
The short story starts with this line:
PROVIDENCE, R.I. - Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick Lynch says his state should recognize the gay marriages of state employees performed in Massachusetts.
And ends with this one:
Lynch spokesman Michael Healey says the opinion is not binding, but a staff attorney for Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders says she expects most government agencies in Rhode Island to heed the legal advice of the state’s top lawyer.
And in between is the rather loose reasoning by this public servant speaking out off turn:
And because there’s no Rhode Island law banning gay marriage -- Lynch says there’s no reason to deny recognition of same-sex unions performed in Massachusetts.
But the headline does say R.I. to recognize gay unions. TO recognize. Not could, or might, or even should. But TO recognize. Yet there is no such law mandating such a recognition. Just the speculation made by Attny. General Lynch.
Yet, the AP's headline makes it seem as if it is a settled decision. That R.I. is going to proceed with this "recognizing".
Just another example of how untrustworthy the AP truly is.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
"Conservatives who are f
February 22, 2007 - 09:19 ET by Mica the Magnificent"Conservatives who are fed up with the AP bias to burn down their headquarters"
I guess that really means we could or won't in AP land. Got it?
I'm sick and tired of falling asleep on the beach and waking up only to find people trying to push me back into the water! - - - Rosie's lament
The subject matter doesn't count, gay, anti-war, smoking, etc.
February 22, 2007 - 09:21 ET by acaiguanaThe subject matter doesn't count, gay, anti-war, smoking, etc.
Incrementalism. Pure and simple.
Chip, chip chip away.
The block gets weaker and finally shatters. This is nothing more than an attempt to dull people's brains to tyranny over their minds.
They do it in the media; they do it in the courts; and they do it in the streets.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
I learned in first year jou
February 22, 2007 - 10:58 ET by Tom1969caI learned in first year journalism school that writing the headline and first paragraph (or "lead") of a story is critical, as nearly 80% of people read no further.
If I've known this since first-year J-school, then the AP knows it too ... and would therefore know that their headline/lead was inaccurate vis a vis the rest of the story.
There is no excuse for this. None. Zero. Zilch. Zip. Nix. Nada.
~~~
VOTE DEMOCRAT!
(It's easier than thinking)
Oh, there's an excuse alright
February 22, 2007 - 12:56 ET by Warner Todd HustonOh, there's an excuse alright.
They are pushing an agenda, THAT is the excuse.
Hold headline writer accountable
February 22, 2007 - 11:32 ET by nkviking75There is a chance that the headline writer was careless, not deceptive. A chance. If that's the case, it's inexcusable, and the headline writer should be held accountable. If it was deliberate, he/she should be fired.