- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Glenn wrote:
Two people have now said this, so I'm going to be receptive to the notion that there is something to it, but as of now, I completely disagree. He's talking to Kurtz - even uses his name - and says:
ARAVOSIS: Why give Brit Hume the opportunity, is the point, Howie. You're -- some people -- some people say are you left, some people say are you right. I think are you fair. I do not think Brit Hume is fair. There's a difference.
He's contrasting Brit Hume (not fair) and Howard Kurtz (fair).
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hmm...I actually read this part completely differently than everyone on here. I think what John is actually doing is framing several questions - i.e. "Some people say 'are you left?' some people say 'are you right?' I think 'are you fair?' I do not think Brit Hume is fair."
IOW, what he is saying is that most people in the media frame every possible argument in terms of "are you left or are you right", but John is saying he prefers to frame it as "are you fair". I didn't read this as in any way having to do with John's opinion of Kurtz as a journalist. It would be different if the words "are" and "you" were reversed - that is "some people say you are left, some people say you are right, I think you are fair". Only then does your reading of this make any sense. Of course, I could be wrong...
