As I am on the East Coast and missing home, I am online getting my HT fix for the morning.
I read both the SB and the Advertiser coverage of the preliminary hearing for Daniel Kahanaoi. What a difference! I commend the Advertiser for a great picture that said more than the article ever could.
The SB seemed very sympathetic to the defendant and his family; I was astonished at the tone of their article, and that was even without seeing the photo on the HA site. After seeing the photo, well, I just don't know what to say. I feel for the victim's family and friends and wish them peace.
This is a great example of the tenet that multiple sources of news is definitely a requirement in a society. I think this is the first time I have seen such a blatant lack of objectivity. Is this only "news" to me?
I read both the SB and the Advertiser coverage of the preliminary hearing for Daniel Kahanaoi. What a difference! I commend the Advertiser for a great picture that said more than the article ever could.
The SB seemed very sympathetic to the defendant and his family; I was astonished at the tone of their article, and that was even without seeing the photo on the HA site. After seeing the photo, well, I just don't know what to say. I feel for the victim's family and friends and wish them peace.
This is a great example of the tenet that multiple sources of news is definitely a requirement in a society. I think this is the first time I have seen such a blatant lack of objectivity. Is this only "news" to me?
Comment