Photo of the page that also has a Drown the Clown feature (Shawn - 8/1/2007 11:51:14 PM)
Who knew that Rupert Murdoch not only had his eye on the Wall Street Journal, but the Free-Lance Star as well? Doing their best Fox News impersonation this morning, the decidedly right-of-center newspaper ran a story on how the Senate race in the 28th District between Albert Pollard and Richard Stuart was turning out to be a very civil affair between two gentlemen (awwwwwwww). But unfortunately they "accidentally" used a headshot of Jonathan Pollard, a convicted spy, instead of Albert.Amazing how they got the wrong Pollard when the Republican, who's picture they got right, has a much more common last name. Recently the FLS had a headline that would have you believe that Mark Cole was out raising Carlos Del Toro when, in reality, nothing could be further from the truth.
Boy can you imagine if Albert was black? Watching Faux News Channel trying to differentiate Barack Obama, Harold Ford Jr. and John Conyers is a comedy of errors bigotry.
1. The name "Johnathan" is not and never will be "Albert"
2. "Johnathan" Pollard was convicted in 1986 and is currently in prision in North Carolina ... the radical right wing Republicans who control the Free Lance Star had to dig deep into photo archives to find his picture.
Here is the online CORRECTION notice: "A portrait identifying Democrat Albert Pollard of Lancaster County was incorrect in today's Free Lance-Star. The correct photos of Pollard and his opponent, Richard Stuart, appear below."
The piece was in a segment titled "Editor's Voice" by Ed Jones ( edjones@freelancestar.com ) is yet another example of right wing Republican Journamalism.
One could say that the FL-S photo editor was just plain lazy. That staring down a deadline, he or she plugged "Pollard" into Google Images search and came up with a photo of Jonathan Pollard. Not knowing what Albert looks like, the person probably thought - hey, looks good to me - and that's how this photo became published. That might be an argument that the FL-S acted incompetently. Oopsy!
But here's the argument that the FL-S deliberately plugged into the story a photo of prison garb-clad convicted felon Jonathan Pollard. That it acted out of arrogance:
The FL-S has, over many years, run stories and photos of Albert Pollard. Surely, before the edition went to bed, someone in the FL-S would have noticed that the photo was not the correct one. Further, Ed Jones, who doesn't have great affinity for blue-state politics and whose name adorns the column in question should have made the correction (even if he doesn't favor Albert Pollard for the Virginia Senate). At the end of the day, HE STILL IS THE PAPER'S NEWS EDITOR. He didn't make the correction. A responsible and ethical journalist or news publication would have made the correction.
I say they acted out of arrogance; that again they are using their news pages for explicit political commentary.
Shame on the FL-S!
My quick cartological review finds some twenty plus counties fall within area of influence.
Note however that even the Washington Post is into extreme news. Judith Warner of the NY Times noted that Robin Givhan and "The Washington Post's penetrating exposé of Hillary Clinton's "surreptitious" show of cleavage on the Senate floor last week ("To display cleavage in a setting that does not involve cocktails and hors d'oeuvres is a provocation") sent me trawling on the Internet, digging through sites like eBay and Hijabs-R-Us, desperate to buy a burqa."
What gives with the printed media?
To definitively set the record straight, here is the official photo of Albert Pollard.
w
