Anti-Father Bias at the Los Angeles Times
March 3rd, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & FamiliesThe Los Angeles Times article Next speaker enjoys broad support (3/2/08) details the rise of Karen Bass, the incoming leader of the California assembly and the first African American woman to be elected to lead a legislative house in the U.S. The piece was a nice example of the subtle and not-so-subtle societal bias against fathers and fatherhood. The article begins:
"Anyone who knew Wilhelmina Bass might understand why her daughter Karen Bass, the Los Angeles Democrat elected Thursday as the next leader of the California Assembly, has devoted her Capitol career to making the state a better parent to its 80,000 foster children.
"A former beauty salon owner who raised Karen and three boys in a well-appointed house in the Venice-Fairfax area, Wilhelmina Bass was a kind, poised, contemplative mother, and 'the notion that people would come into this world and not have loving parents has always caused Karen pain,' said Sylvia Castillo, Bass' district director and a friend for three decades."
We all know the script: heroic, overwhelmed black mother raises her kids herself, and now one of them has done mama proud by making good in the world. Yet, believe it or not, Bass actually had a father, too.
It is only much further down in the story, after we are already assuming that Bass was raised by a single mom, that we are told, "She credits her father, DeWitt, a mail carrier, for making her a 'news junkie' -- Bass said she used to wake at 4:30 a.m. to listen to the radio with him before he began his route."
In fact, in the autobiographical information that Bass herself provided the Democratic Party, she wrote, "Karen has dedicated her life to improving our neighborhoods. Her father, DeWitt Bass--a letter carrier for 40 years--and mother, Wilhelmina, raised Karen and her three brothers in the Venice/Fairfax neighborhood."
In other words, Bass saw herself as being raised by both parents, and it even seems like she was at least a bit of a daddy's girl. Why did the Los Angeles Times choose to place far more importance on her mother than on her father?
To write a letter to the editor of the Los Angeles Times, click on letters@latimes.com. Nancy Vogel, the Los Angeles Times Staff Writer who wrote the story, can be reached at nancy.vogel@latimes.com.
"));
19 queries. 0.338 seconds.
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:08 am
Glenn,
I wonder how the DV establishment and those who have the "best interests of the child" will respond to this one?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,334381,00.html
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:28 am
Glenn, you might find this one interesting in the WSJ:
Spending Gone Wild:
What's a Spouse to Do?
By JEFF OPDYKE
March 2, 2008
Apparently the now female-pandering WSJ can only find examples of men being wild spenders. This quote by a woman about her fiance' is a real classic:
"I dreaded him having contact with outside human beings," she says, "because he'd come home with some harebrained idea. One of his friends owned real estate in North Carolina, so [her fiancé] decided to buy a condo" near San Diego that he wanted to flip for a profit. Only, she says, "he mixed up his financial and emotional decisions, and wasn't sure if he should keep it and brag about owning a second home or sell it."
Can you imagine a man being quoted as saying this about a woman? "I dreaded her having contact with outside human beings," he says, "because she'd come home with some harebrained idea."
Funny thing is, it would seem that so many women get their "ideas" about destroying their families in family court from "outside human beings".
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:52 am
Glenn, this just explains the decline in journalistic standards or rather the mediocrity of these folks in terms of intellect and integrity. I bet who ever this reporter was, either new on the job and wanted to create a dramatic story. And face it - it is harder to make a "good" story with the father as the center, or a side.
I think the reporter should have gone forward and mentioned how little she saw her father. Or maybe how she feared her father the most and then make it sound as if its not out of respect but of violence. Make it sound like he was a hindrance than support. That would have completed a full "good" story.
But quite frankly, I think the reporter did not have brains enough to be honest, that is all.
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:53 am
"I dreaded him having contact with outside human beings," she says, ..."
If you Google the Duluth Model "power and control wheel," this is defined as domestic abuse by feminists under the criminal category of ISOLATION.
The first time a young man encounters this psychological passive-aggression with a female is typically when he starts dating someone and she says -- "your friends make me uncomfortable."
As soon as he dumps his buddies to spend all his time with her, (she will reward him with sex) -- it is a short trip to the altar and domestic servitude.
Sad but true.
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:59 am
PS - I appreciate that Glen has defined and clarified his moderation rules.
They basically say that he expects posters to be reasonable and civil, like you were invited to his home or office.
And, he reserves the absolute right to exile anybody who damages his property.
So, contribute. But don't litter. K?
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:54 am
Anyone interested in a good personal story about the importance of fathers in children’s lives should read the biography of Oprah Winfrey.
There are several accounts on the internet, but I heard Oprah tell a somewhat different story on PBS.
Regardless of the specific details it’s astoundingly clear that her father is “totally” and “irrefutably” the person responsible for the success of the person who now controls an empire.
Find out about her “true story”. It really is one of the most important stories in American Culture, and one that all fathers should know of, and be proud of.
Without her father, Oprah would have been just another statistic.
Kevin Merck
March 3rd, 2008 at 12:00 pm
The editors at the media have a blackout for man good messages, as seen in the above example at the LA Times.
The government's schools also promote man bad, woman good messages like the previous blog titled "Feminist 'Hate Statistics' on Display at George Washington University"
The government also promotes men as violent and woman as innocent victims. The "Coaching Boys Into Men”
Domestic Violence Public Awareness Media Campaign spends dollars that hard working male taxpayers earn to paint them as abusers.
The government's anti-male campaign, which will run statewide – from Brooklyn to Buffalo and everywhere in-between – consists of:
- Television and radio public service announcement
- Billboards, bus shelters and phone kiosks
- Posters and brochures in five languages – English, Spanish, Haitian-Creole, Russian and Chinese
- Web advertising
http://www.opdv.state.ny.us/public_awareness/coachboys_campaign/index.htm
http://www.mediaradar.org/alert20080303.php
The media, academics, and government are large, powerful, and effective cultural influencers. They have socialized hate towward men early in children and reinforce hate in adults. The government prints it own money and employs many people (1 in 5 employees work for the government) to promote its agenda with propaganda.
March 3rd, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Last week Bill O'Reilly had a guest, Lisa Pinto, on his program discussing the mom, Melissa Dean, who went on strike because her teenage sons were incorrigible, both he and his guest were having a feeding frenzy regarding the boys and asking "where is the father?", never once placing the onus for the boys incorrigibility on the mother, O'Reilly stated that "millions" of fathers abandon their children, I wrote him and asked him to back up his statement..... I'm still waiting for a reply from him.
Speaking from experience, after my mother divorced my father, I, as a young teenage boy, would walk all over her, the she married my step-father and he put an end to my irresponsible behavior immediately.
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Supreme Court [a government agency] Allows Fine of $1,172,100.00 Against Employer For Failure To Quickly Pay Withheld Child Support
The Illinois Supreme Court reversed Appellate Court decision that reversed a $1,172,100.00 penalty imposed against an employer who withheld child support of $82 per week but failed to pay it over in a timely fashion was unconstitutional as applied. In re Marriage of Miller, No. 104022 and 104035 (Cons.), 227 Ill.2d 185, 879 N.E.2d 292, 316 Ill.Dec. 225 (Ill. Nov. 29, 2007).
Although the penalty is harsh when compared to the amount of child support, the societal interests "warranted the fine; therefore, the statute was not unconstitutional..."
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:06 pm
A copy of my letter to the L.A. Times and Ms. Vogel:
Knowing that good journalism technique puts the most salient information at the front of the article, and the "fill-in" near the end, I don't always read to the end of an article. If I had failed to read deep into this article, I would have been left with the clear impression that the new Speaker was raised by her mother in a single-parent household. Only much later was it mentioned that she was raised by a father and mother -- a father who had a large and positive influence in her life. I wonder whether relegating Ms. Bass' father to the status of "fill-in" was inadvertent or intentional. If inadvertent, it is inexplicable; if intentional, it is inexcusable -- unless encouraging dismissive attitudes toward fathers is considered to be a good thing. You folks are really good at avoiding what might be considered sexist attitudes toward women. When it comes to sexism affecting men, it appears you have blinders on.
March 3rd, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Here was mine:
Dear Ms. Vogel,
The following statement in the article Next Speaker Enjoys Broad Support:
"A former beauty salon owner who raised Karen and three boys in a well-appointed house in the Venice-Fairfax area, Wilhelmina Bass was a kind, poised, contemplative mother, and 'the notion that people would come into this world and not have loving parents has always caused Karen pain,' said Sylvia Castillo, Bass' district director and a friend for three decades."
is an example of anti-father bias.
Ms. Bass was also "raised by" her father, and I respectfully ask that you issue an apology.
Sincerely,
Michael H
March 3rd, 2008 at 6:20 pm
For anyone who is working in e-marketing in any business, I might suggest this somewhat blunt approach to this paper which is no stranger to "blunt instrument" journalism:
Dear LA Times,
One wonders what was your purpose in pandering to women and implicitly belittling a father's contribution with this article's extremely belated near-non-mention of the father's crucial role. Is it that you know that you want to suck up to busy women who, according to your market research, are the ones who place your "paper" under household pets, and otherwise use it as a fish-wrapper?
Well, that may be, but did you ever consider who it is in America who is primarily controlling and making decisions about newspaper advertising budgets, including Internet ad budgets in particular? (Noting that Internet adversiting seems to be the only bright spot in the steadily declining newspaper revenues in this country -- including yours.)
If you start to see material chunks of e-advertising suddenly vaporizing from your electronic edition and from your revenue streams, and you see other e-ad campaigns seemingly taking a detour around the electronic version of your paper, maybe you will muster up enough immagination and analytical insight to connect up these events with your own improper editorial conduct towards that near-half of the U.S. population known as "men", and that even more important population called "fathers".
Men as a group show many indications of being fair-minded by nature. This means that balanced reporting is not going to offend them, while slanted reporting most assuredly will offend them, and this article is one example of many in which you have done just that.
You may have evolved a "screw-em" attitude towards men, thinking that they are not your "customers" because they are not the majority of those who pay for weekly deliveries, and/or that women like it when you suck up to them at the expense of men and fathers. But as your revenue and profit mix moves ever more towards advertising and ever more towards customers who practice "the highly mathematical and statistically based process of buying and optimizing adversiting via the web", you might be well advised to think again about the demographics of those who truly and directly control your top-line revenue.
I can assure you that in the world of purchasing quantitatively analyzed and statistically optimized media buying (i.e., virtually all web advertising) women are few and far between. I'm not sure why this is. Maybe it's just that they don't like math?
And perhaps you are aware, the steps needed to get rid of an errant, biased, morally dishonest newspaper from a massive internet budget, are in fact a completely trivial exercise taking no more than a few mouse clicks by the person "manning" those controls.
Maybe one reason why your paper is consistently doing worse than its peers in the U.S. is that when it comes to certain realizations about your own marketplace interdependencies, you folks are somewhat "behind the TIMES" so to speak.
Sincerely,
Your Advertising P&L's Worst Nightmare
(a.k.a., "Click, Click -- Goodbye!")
March 3rd, 2008 at 6:39 pm
P.S.
According to this article in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/19/business/media/19hiller.html?hp), the LA Times has all the markings of a multi-year business disaster run by editors who appear to think they rule the paper and apparently the news too.
One can see how the LA Times has in the past apparently suffered from this bird-brained editorial management, for example:
"...The Times, one of a handful of newspapers with a claim to national standing: its daily circulation of almost 800,000 is the fourth-largest circulation of any American newspaper and the largest in the West, and it dominates the second-biggest market in the country, after New York.
But The Times has also been battered by years of flagging revenue, management turnover and newsroom cutbacks.
The paper’s owner, the Tribune Company of Chicago, sent Mr. Hiller to California in late 2006 to impose some discipline, fiscal and otherwise. He took the place of a popular publisher and promptly fired a popular top editor, both of them forced out for refusing to carry out the latest round of staff cuts ordered by Tribune."
Refusing to carry out staff cuts. Wow. These twits ought to look for jobs in government -- or the State courts!
Clearly they think they "own" the paper, they "own" the news, and that THEIR opinion is all that counts. Just the kinds of people you would expect to engage in zealous, biased, reporting.
Who knows, maybe Mr. David Hiller can use a "degree of biased reporting criterion" to help him make his next round of job cut decisions at the LA Times. Can't imagine anyone faulting him for firing biased reporters.
Click, Click, Click.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:23 pm
"A former beauty salon owner mother and mail carrier father who raised Karen and three boys in a well-appointed house in the Venice-Fairfax area…”
Was that so damn hard???
DanH
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Why did the Los Angeles Times choose to place far more importance on her mother than on her father?
The headline makes it clear. She only cultivates the support of broads. :)
March 4th, 2008 at 12:54 am
I am temporally speechless!
b
March 4th, 2008 at 2:03 am
Editor Los Angeles Times, Nancy Vogel Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
Re: the article "Next speaker enjoys broad support" March 2, 2008
I found this article lacking journalistic taste and decorum. While boosting about Wilhelmina Bass and her daughter Karen Bass an illusion was created as though her mother was a spectacular single working woman raising four children by herself. Karen was a disadvantaged child because she was fatherless and should rightfully be proud of her accomplishments. It was not until the seventeenth paragraph that we find out that she had a father Dewitt only mentioned as an after thought.
While boosting about and capitalizing on "the first black female" and her accomplishments you temporally perpetuated a black stereotype that is in reality problematic in their community. The LA times should be embarrassed for itself.
It is shameful to play a story that no doubt increases circulation as "firsts" often do, at the same conspicuously not acknowledging a father and his contributions until the second half of the article. When this article finally addresses her father, it does so in an at best anemic way only stating that her father turned her in to a news junkie and was a postal carrier. I am sure that he contributed much more to her fine upbringing, outstanding work ethic, honesty, and drive to succeed. This article does not just minimize his part but completely ignores his parenting. This attitude is surprising in this century when people today are deluged with articles and studies about how important a fathers influence is to the future success of the families children. I strongly urge the Los Angeles Times in future articles to place fathers where they belong regarding a child�s success. This would be squarely and equally with the mother.
Thank you for your time in this matter
Bernard S Misiura Jr
March 4th, 2008 at 7:41 am
"We all know the script: heroic, overwhelmed black mother raises her kids herself, and now one of them has done mama proud by making good in the world. Yet, believe it or not, Bass actually had a father, too."
This isn't racist?
March 4th, 2008 at 8:04 am
One has to wonder why Nancy Vogel and the LA Times are minimizing the importance of Mr. Bass. Is it because he is a man, a father, a black father, or all three?
January 1st, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Interesting that Karen Bass is not afraid to support Glenn's position publicly. I have the impression that most politicians are politically correct out of fear. Is there a shift in public opinion? Are we growing less radioactive?
January 15th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
http://LosAngelesOnlinePharmacy.Com