There is a curious reaction that is sometimes seen in patients who have had a stroke (CVA or Cerebral-Vascular Accident in medical parlance) in which they do not recognize the loss of function in the area affected by the stroke. They may have been paralyzed on one side of their body but act as if nothing is wrong or they may have cortical blindness for half their visual field but be completely unaware of their visual defect. In my youth I was a passenger in a car driven by a friend's Great-Uncle who apparently had had a silent stroke and had developed left-sided neglect. Our brief, 5 minute drive was much more interesting than most short jaunts and culminated in my friend reaching across from the front passenger seat to yank the wheel and pull us back into the right lane and out of the path of the oncoming traffic. The experience was a rather graphic example of the danger of such neurological neglect.
In today's New York Times, there is an example of "news reporting neglect syndrome" that is so significant that it suggests a life threatening condition which has thus far not been recognized by the victim.
The story, Justice Dept. Opens Inquiry Into Leak of Domestic Spying, which was apparently taken verbatim from the AP, opens with this:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Justice Department has opened an investigation into the leak of classified information about President Bush's secret domestic spying program, Justice officials said Friday.
The officials, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the probe, said the inquiry will focus on disclosures to The New York Times about warrantless surveillance conducted by the National Security Agency since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
The articles continues by describing how the Times revealed the existence of the secret program after holding the story for a year, partly at the request of the administration and partly because the paper wanted to confirm various aspects of the story. (Somehow the Times neglects to mention their financial interest in gaining publicity stemming from their relationship with a forthcoming book in which the program is mentioned, but withholding news that makes them look venal is nothing new and is at least understandable in psychological terms.) It is the next bit that is so remarkable and makes me worry about the long term neurological functioning of the Times:
The story unleashed a firestorm of criticism of the administration. Some critics accused the president of breaking the law by authorizing intercepts of conversations -- without prior court approval or oversight -- of people inside the United States and abroad who had suspected ties to al-Qaida or its affiliates.
There is no mention in this or later in the story, that much of the "firestorm of criticism" was, in fact, directed at the Times and the leakers who have imperiled our national security and safety for reasons that at best are misguided and at worst are down right treasonous. For a newspaper which touts itself as the "paper of record" and printing "all the news that's fit to print" to leave out much more than half of the story, merely because it doesn't fit their agenda is dangerously misguided. This is a major story about a very significant breach, yet that aspect is ignored or minimized by the Times. Even if, as is obvious, the editors of the Times do not consider the leak a major part of the story, the fact of a Justice Department investigation suggests that someone else considers the leak and the leakers a major part of the story. A responsible article would include, indeed would emphasize, that fact.
Earlier this week, I posted on The Suicidal Pursuit of Perfection, in which I described the self defeating behavior of those who demand an unrealistic standard of perfection from themselves and others. The Left, of which the Times is a charter member, have all the ear marks of a structure bent on self-destruction. However, the possibility of a less psychiatric and more neurological explanation for their self-destructive behavior, cannot be completely discounted.
It is possible that the Times and its reporters literally do not recognize that they are neglecting the 75% of the world who do not agree with their stance. As such, they would not be omitting the news because they do not agree with it, but because they literally do not see it as news.
If a stroke patient who neglects half his visual field is allowed to continue driving, they will almost certainly have a major accident before too long. They may not be suicidal, which requires intent, but instead are in deadly danger because of their own disability, lack of awareness of their disability, and poor judgment. For a so-called news organization to continue publishing when they exhibit such an obvious disability when it comes to recognizing news is likely to prove fatal in the long run.
One week after our harrowing ride with my fiend's Great Uncle, the man drove his car through the front window of a bank. Thankfully, no one was seriously injured and he lost his driving license in short order. For their own good, perhaps someone should remove the license for the Times to collect and disseminate news.
Recent Comments