Each of the authors rejects the authority of government to censor speech. Each condemns the Human Rights Commissions as illegitimate–as, essentially, kangaroo courts … But each, also, accepts that the accused in the given cases (i.e. Mark Steyn and Stephen Boissoin) have said something “hateful”.
Now, don’t get me wrong: this would be just fine … except that none of these columnists–as per journalistic convention–spends so much as a sentence demonstrating what, exactly, makes the opinions in question hateful! They are united in their easy posturing to the effect that assholes should be allowed to spout nonsense, but they do not so much as dare to doubt that Steyn and Boissoin are assholes and that theirs is nonsense.
What should concern us is not the political toadying at work here, but the trend of journalistic incompetence.
I prefer “malpractice”. Journalists are among the chosen few who hold the power to damage, even destroy the lives of innocent people. They should be held accountable for professional laziness, cowardice and agenda-driven reporting.
Oh, wait….
