GLAAD to MSM: Fallacious discrimination is not punditry
We've long said that basic respect and decent treatment aren't concepts towards which we as a society can or should "agree to disagree." And we've long been annoyed with the way the mainstream media likes to present human beings' lives, loves, and intrinsic worth as a two-sided, "Crossfire"-style debate (especially when they feature figures like Peter "let's export and/or criminalize gays" Sprigg, as CNN recently did). Because obviously, a conversation regarding who is and is not supposedly acceptable within our shared spectrum of normalcy is one that transcends politics. Those who castigate LGBT people for virtues no greater than sexual orientation and gender identity are not simply bringing forth a "different viewpoint" -- they are working to "cure" what is not broken.
Now we're happy to say that GLAAD is turning that notion into a national campaign:
We like this effort. It feels perfectly timed. While we firmly believe in highlighting the anti-gay opposition (and do so everyday), we also reject that point/counterpoint style that is the norm of cable news gay rights debate. That style works for some issues. It does not work for human rights.
And if groups like FRC want to respond to this kind of campaign, then they're eventually going to have to respond to the kinds of things their own fellows have actually said in punditry roles:
*SOURCE: Gays seek immigration reform [Medill Reports]
These folks' abstract messenger-shooting will only go so far. In fact, it's gone too far already, with too little feet/fire-holding.
comments powered by Disqus