I was watching the news tonight on PBS and they were interviewing two idiots about the Olympic torch fiasco. One was from Human Rights Watch and is an idiot because of her childlike simplification of complex issues as is common of a zealout of any stripe. The other was some Chinese American who is an idiot because he is a traitor apologist.
The thing that struck me and has actually struck me several times over the past couple weeks is the obvious questions the reporters miss. Why do they do that? I would expect it of the sound byte constricted on the news networks but would have hoped for better on PBS Lehrer Report.
The traitor started about by saying how he supports people's rights to demonstrate and make their opinion known. So the obvious question is 'yet you don't support a similar right for Chinese? Why not? Then the traitor goes on to say that what the world needs to do is 'engage' China in quiet diplomacy. So the obvious reporter response is: 'I could show you an interview with someone like you for every year from 1989 till the present and their recommended prescription would be the same. What gain in political, not economic, rights have the Chinese people realized after 20 years of 'quiet engagement'?
Of course, since I'm not from Human Rights Watch, I understand the Realpolitik and economic factors that drive our government to act in the way it does. But it is the media's job to probe and question and yet time after time they seem to accept this notion of 'engagement' at face value.