We cats have often noticed that headline writers have their heads up their ass. But it usually applies to local publications like the Albany Times-Union, not the vaunted paper of record, The New York Times. Well, we guess there's a first time for everything. (Unless, OMG, this isn't the first time.)
Readers across our nation are left to wonder if The New York Times really thinks that NATO is the "North American Treaty Organization," or if this error was a case of an intern gone rogue. Or worse, that their editorial staff really doesn't know the real, spelled-out name of NATO. That implies a whole lot of other, more serious stuff, which we cats don't really want to think about.
This year, Democrats need to message voters about the history of NATO and why it is so important. They need to explain that NATO is not an offensive, but a defensive, organization. (If people are reminded that NATO came to our defense after 9/11, that would make it crystal clear.) Voters also need to understand why NATO is crucial as a bulwark against Russian aggression. They can learn why Ukraine's membership is key to the future of the alliance — and why Putin hates NATO (and why Benedict Donald is doing Putin's bidding in trying to weaken it).
The state of journalism today is wildly worrisome. We cats would like to think that smarter heads will prevail, but to be honest, we're not sure. Until then, we worry, and we HISS.
No comments:
Post a Comment