Monica Hesse

Despite a claim by Washington Post Ombudsman Andrew Alexander, that "accusations of journalistic overkill" in the newspaper's recent coverage of same-sex marriage are "off-base," the Post itself keeps piling up evidence of its pro-gay agenda.

The Culture and Media Institute found that between March 3, the day after same-sex couples could being applying for marriage licenses in the District of Columbia, through March 10, one week later, the Post devoted nearly 543 inches of column space (almost four full pages) to the new law and what it meant for local gay couples. Supporters of the changed policy were quoted 10 times more than opponents.

Alexander spoke with CMI last week about its review of the Post's coverage, but between March 18 and March 25, the newspaper devoted another 191 inches of column space to gay rights. Thirty-four different pro-gay quotes appeared in four stories, one of which was written by a bisexual, while the opposing view did not appear at all.

In seven days, the Washington Post:

• Ran 11 articles related to D.C.'s new law allowing same-sex marriage.
• Devoted 543 inches of column space to the ruling - equal to nearly four full pages.
• Printed 14 photos of gay celebrations, including a prominent one of two men kissing.
• Quoted supporters 11 times more often than opponents - 67 to 6.
• Repeatedly compared gay marriage to the historic civil rights movement. 

Nobody can accuse The Washington Post of being objective when it came to covering the District of Columbia's decision to legalize same-sex marriage. The Post has reported on the event with a celebratory zeal more appropriate to The Advocate or The Blade.

Is there anything stranger than a liberal reporter being upset that a semi-nude picture from 1982 didn’t sink a political candidate? Washington Post reporter Monica Hesse stamped on the sour grapes on Wednesday with a temper tantrum of an article on the front page of the Style section headlined "It’s okay. Scott Brown was just being a man. Ah, gender equity. That Cosmo spread might have sunk a woman".

What a snide, opinionated headline! Hesse began by suggesting nude pics had surfaced of Martha Coakley, and then, surprise, it was the other way around. Hesse’s topic sentence: "The morning after the election, a student of gender politics might ask: How different would the story have looked if the shoe -- Lack of shoes? Lack of clothes? -- actually had been on the female body?"

She found an expert to endorse and repeat the complaint:

The Style section of the Washington Post isn’t exactly a repository of old-fashioned small town values, which made staff writer Monica Hesse’s Nov. 12 article that much more surprising.

Her piece: “Publicly, a whole new lewdness,” related the stories of commuters, airline passengers and others exposed to “secondhand smut” – that is, people in the uncomfortable position of having neighbors watching porn in public on laptops and BlackBerrys.

“But the increasing popularity of laptops and handheld devices, and the prevalence of wireless Internet access, means there’s a greater chance of becoming a bystander to a complete stranger's viewing proclivities,” Hesse wrote.

One anecdote involved a woman who was on a long flight with her young children, when “her friendly seatmate cued up a cartoon on his laptop. Her four children were enthralled; she hoped listening in might keep them occupied. Then the cartoon characters started doing things that cartoon characters should not be doing. Naked things …”

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals is a very ideological and controversial group. Anyone who can compare chickens on our dinner tables to the Holocaust might not be welcome in everyone’s home. But if you read The Washington Post on Wednesday, you might think they’re just having fun with nudity. On the front of the Style section was a gushy profile by Monica Hesse headlined "PETA volunteers' body of work speaks for those who can't." Is this a news story or a commercial? Here’s how it began:

The PETA interns have beautiful skin and lovely teeth. They have shiny hair and the buzzy energy that comes, they'd say, from avoiding animal products and animal byproducts, and from the peaceful belief that through their work, you can be helped, too.

Outraged advocates of same-sex marriage have forced the Washington Post into an apology for running a features piece last week that portrayed an opponent as more than an evil, bigoted, hatemongering fundamentalist.

The profile examined Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, one of the groups that lobbied for Proposition 8, the hotly-contested California State ballot initiative that explicitly defined marriage as between and man and a woman, overturning a State Supreme Court decision to the contrary.

Pundits on the left called the features piece, written by Monica Hesse—who says she is a bisexual and has had romantic relationships with women in the past—“absurd,” “bizarre,” and “accusatory and belittling.”

All parties, no matter how rip-roaringly fun, must eventually come to an end. Hardly any of them get a newspaper obituary. But Washington Post's Monica Hesse was on hand to offer a parting toast to the "Guerrilla Queer Bar", wherein gay and lesbian revelers would "invade" a "straight bar" to dance and drink the night away, all in the name of promoting "tolerance" of alternative lifestyles.

Alas, lamented Hesse in her April 6 story, "[a]fter five years, 43 bars, 48 events, and at least one instance of a guy whipping his shirt off and gyrating to Madonna in front of confused Georgetown University parents, it was time for a beloved gay and lesbian institution to end."

What Hesse failed to mention anywhere in her 23-paragraph article is her previous attendance at said "guerrilla" events, conducted in a non-journalistic capacity. Hesse is second-from-left in the picture above, taken at one such bar outing from 2004, and included in a Post story by Fritz Hahn.

Triads. Quads. V's.  No, it's not a math lesson, it's the terminology used to describe relationships by polyamorists.  Not sure what those are?  Lucky you have the February 13 edition of The Washington Post's "Style" section to enlighten you. And if you read far enough into the copy you'll also find a game plan for redefining marriage. More on that in a minute.

In what can only be described as a Valentine to immorality and provocative behavior, the Post ran a 2554-word feature on polyamory that describes a practice most readers - even the liberal fans of the Post - would find disturbing. Sometimes called "swinging" or "wife swapping," polyamory is the practice of openly having several sexual partners, regardless and sometimes in spite of, marital status.

I saw this yesterday but didn't work up anything on it. Basically it's a lame Style section front-pager from Sunday that fixates on how dull/boring/lame/stupid-sounding the name "Fred" is, and what that means for presumptive GOP presidential candidate Fred Thompson.

Fortunately Myra Langerhas of "Snarking Dawg" worked up a snarky blog post and so I thought I'd share that with you. Below is the relevant excerpt from Myra's August 12 entry "What's in a name?"

Myra began by quoting the first seven grafs of staff writer Monica Hesse's August 12 article and then laid out swipe at the author's biases and decidedly liberal cosmopolitan tastes, like joining a bunch of lesbians in "crashing" a "straight bar.":

In the July 22 Washington Post, writer Monica Hesse interviewed Ron DeFore of the SUV Owners of America (SUVOA), for her Style section front-pager, "A Man Who Wants SUVs to Get More R-E-S-P-E-C-T."

But far from respect, Hesse's interview at turns shifted from an almost "Daily Show"-like mockery to an unqualified parroting of liberal talking points. You can find her interview here, but I found these three questions particularly to be cheap shots: