By R.K. Barry and Michael J.W. Stickings
Tucker Carlson's web creation, The Daily Caller, had a dumb-ass little piece up yesterday suggesting that Michelle Obama's campaign to get people to exercise more may be responsible for a spike in pedestrian deaths. You know, if you walk more for your health, you might just get hit by a car.
Apparently someone by the name of Barbara Harsha, Executive Director of the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), suggested if more people are getting out to exercise, they need to be mindful that steel and rubber objects traveling at significant speeds might run them over if they fail to keep their wits about them.
Sensible enough, I suppose.
Of course, by the time The Daily Caller got a hold of it, it read like this:
Apparently someone by the name of Barbara Harsha, Executive Director of the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA), suggested if more people are getting out to exercise, they need to be mindful that steel and rubber objects traveling at significant speeds might run them over if they fail to keep their wits about them.
Sensible enough, I suppose.
Of course, by the time The Daily Caller got a hold of it, it read like this:
In an interview with the Washington Examiner, Harsha said that while there are not yet definitive answers as to why there were more pedestrian deaths in 2010 than 2009, Obama's "get moving" movement could be at least partially to blame.
Okay, fine. Ridiculous, but I get your non-point.
Apparently pedestrian fatalities have increased significantly in the first part of 2010, though no one knows why.
Ms. Harsha claims, in a phone call with Derek Thompson of The Atlantic, to have been misquoted, though it appears more likely that she is credited with saying something she never said. That's not a misquote. That's a fabrication. There's a difference. (The piece at The Daily Caller has been updated to reflect Harsha's claim but still asserts that the GHSA blamed Michelle Obama.)
Apparently pedestrian fatalities have increased significantly in the first part of 2010, though no one knows why.
Ms. Harsha claims, in a phone call with Derek Thompson of The Atlantic, to have been misquoted, though it appears more likely that she is credited with saying something she never said. That's not a misquote. That's a fabrication. There's a difference. (The piece at The Daily Caller has been updated to reflect Harsha's claim but still asserts that the GHSA blamed Michelle Obama.)
Technorati has a good description of what was said and what was not said. Here is what was said:
"There's an emphasis these days to getting fit, and I think people doing that are more exposed to risk [of getting hit by a vehicle]," said Harsha, who conceded to having no scientific evidence that the Let's Move campaign has led to an increase in walkers and runners, or deaths.
I guess that qualifies as a statement that Michelle Obama is responsible for the demise of innocent pedestrians.
Anyway, it just bothers me that this is so often the level of discourse in America at this moment in our history. Ms. Harsha's comments were clearly innocent enough, but innocent doesn't cut it these days, not when the right-wing media are hell-bent on repeating each others lies to fabricate a story.
(Cross-posted at Lippmann's Ghost.)
**********
UPDATE: TPM explains what happened. Basically, The Daily Caller and The Examiner, two conservative media outlets, blatantly misrepresented a GHSA report. That report simply noted that "[a] focus on liveable communities, or 'get moving' health and fitness programs may increase walking and pedestrian-vehicle conflicts."
"That makes it seems like we're blaming Michelle Obama's program," GHSA executive director Barbara Harsha told TPM. "That's ridiculous."
Indeed it is. And while The Daily Caller has added updates to its piece, the misrepresentation -- and the attempt to smear the First Lady, continues.
Consider the piece's "new" headline: "Highway safety spokesperson blames pedestrian deaths on Michelle Obama's anti-obesity campaign?
Yes, that's right, a question mark has been added -- as if that makes such gross, partisan misrepresentation acceptable.
It would sort of be like me changing a post titled "Rational people can all agree that Tucker Carlson is a pompous douchebag" to "Rational people can all agree that Tucker Carlson is a pompous douchebag?"
And why would I ever do that?
No comments:
Post a Comment