Readers had strong ethical views on the “War Stories” on whether a reporter interviewing a potential terrorist has a duty to turn him or her in. The post below is part of a long, highly recommended discussion. “Dad Again,” with its look at sibling rivalry, and the “Moneybox” on The Osbournes brought many posts—everyone has a view on family dynamics.
Subject: Truth vs. Right
Re: “War Stories: Write vs. Wrong”
From: American Muslim
Date: Thu Apr 25 10:24 a.m. PT
Decisions about story writing and publication are governed by pragmatic issues. And since decisions are made in this way … is it really asking too much to say that potential loss of life should always be included among the influential factors? We are apt to make hypothetical puzzle-situations and try to solve them, e.g., would I want to protect a potential first-time terrorist were I a journalist, etc. And that’s fine … But that doesn’t change the fact that in reality the purveying of truth is a dubious proposition in any climate or place. Adding humane considerations to the ethical standards that individual journalists carry around can hardly make it that much more difficult.
[Find this post here.]
Subject: Helping One Another
Re: “Frame Game: Get It Straight”
From: Thrasymachus
Date: Thu Apr 25 8:40 a.m. PT
It’s a bit surprising to hear the church complaining that the moral failings of the priesthood are society’s fault. After all, if it’s suddenly society’s job to provide counseling and moral guidance to the priesthood, well, what the heck are they for?
[Find this post here.]
Subject: Right To Change
Re: “Assessment: The Ugly Europeans”
From: Zathras
Date: Fri Apr 26 8:52 a.m. PT
The problem [isn’t] bigotry; it is change. Of all the world’s peoples, Americans have the culture, economy, and political institutions best able to help them adapt to change without losing livelihoods or having our way of life suddenly changed beyond recognition, and it isn’t easy for us. It must be much more difficult for Europeans, who have cultural traditions much older than ours and whose craving for a quiet, predictable life was probably strengthened by the deadly turmoil that enveloped the continent within the memory of many of the people living there.
[Find this post here.]
Subject: Family Matters
Re: “Dad Again: Sister Trouble”
From: Mangar
Date: TueApr 23 5:04 p.m. PT
It’s the baby, honestly, who has the most to fear from their older siblings! In every single culture studied, if there is not enough to go around when a new baby comes, it is the baby that suffers, goes unfed, goes uncared for. The older sibling represents a few years of investment toward sexual maturity, and is therefore more valuable (in terms of reproductive success) to the parents. It’s like a $100 government bond that you’ve had for 10 years and one that you just bought. If you had to give one away, which would it be? … However, once sexual maturity is reached, the tables turn. After the initial parental investment is over, the younger sibling will always have more reproductive years left than the older one.
[Find this post here.]
Fray Notes:
The “Low Concept” on Richard Nixon produced a list we never thought we’d see: Netchecker tells us what Nixon and Marilyn Monroe had in common.
Cagle’s cartoon site has an edgy international feature described as “World cartoons that you might not like,” which enabled Fray posters to show their tolerance: As Michael S. said, “it is crucial that we Americans … get an honest, uncensored view of how others view us.”
Stars this week went to Sheila Samples and Oliver Hellenbach, both popular posters on “Today’s Papers.” Rich Mahady got one, too: He posts in many different Frays. The three of them are always ready to engage in great arguments with other posters.
Butterscotch has launched a quiz to see who is addicted toSlate and the Fray: Answer the questions and add up your score, and see if you can beat Marylb’s 175 and Mfbenson’s “over 200.” Of course, another big topic this week was whether posters are completely honest in the Fray, so it’s possible the results are tainted.
Meanwhile, Fraysters discussed the new editor of Slate, and Mangar told us plainly what he wants from the magazine: “more … analysis … What I want is somebody going out on a limb to explain or theorize on what’s going on. That way, from my little hole in the Fray, I can take a whack at that limb and try to make the person look foolish for giving me an analysis.” That should have people lining up to write for you, Mangar.
