Fox News article here.
Besides the nonsensical article title, this is just plain horrible journalism.
Right off the bat we have this opening statement "Two of President Barack Obama’s top fundraisers will face confirmation votes in the U.S. Senate after being nominated for ambassadorships that they are far from qualified for."
You might think that Fox will go on to list what would be considered appropriate qualifications for an ambassadorship, but you would be wrong. Beyond mentioning that the two nominees helped raise money for the Obama campaign, nothing else is presented as to why they are not qualified. The author then goes on to mention that he has nominated other political allies for various positions, as if this classification automatically disqualifies a nominee from a post. The article finished with this gem: "Though many of Obama’s nominees have lacked the qualifications to properly serve as ambassadors, Mamet and Bell seem to be two of his worst choices."
Claims should be backed with evidence. Maybe comparing the two nominees to other ambassadors would put the article in context, but Fox can't be bothered with that. Journalists should hold themselves to higher standards.
No comments:
Post a Comment