There’s plenty of religious butthurt to go around in the wake of the Supreme Court’s big ‘Duh’ in support of gay marriage. Given the cold-eyed seriousness with which the believers have been warning us about the wrath of God and the end of civilization, don’t blame me for doing a little head scratching over this bow-shot from The Federalist:
BuzzFeed’s Journalistic Struggles On Same-Sex Marriage…
With a standards guide in one hand and a Bible in the other, famous queer obsessive Mollie Hemingway takes it to Buzzfeed, in the style. That is…In GIFs. OMG, it’s about time somebody told those guys about Ethics in Journalism.
After the ruling, any pretense of objectivity that remained largely washed away as media elites joined progressive politicians…Among many other media outlets, BuzzFeed changed its social media avatars and literally marched in gay pride parades…
So while progressives celebrated, tens of millions of Americans outside of newsrooms reacted with quite different emotions. The contrast was pronounced and profoundly alienating.
What was it that drove Mollie to profound alienation? This:
— Frank Pallotta (@frankpallotta) June 26, 2015
A rainbow avatar. Why did you think you were allowed to do that, Ben?
On Friday, he told the On Media blog that BuzzFeed’s Twitter avatar was in keeping with its standards guide: “We firmly believe that for a number of issues, including civil rights, women’s rights, anti-racism, and LGBT equality, there are not two sides.”
Wait a minute – you’re telling me that Lot isn’t allowed a side? I suppose Abel doesn’t deserve one either, huh? This is what you call ‘journalism’?
Does it consider the right to end an unborn life a “women’s rights” issue on which there are not two sides? Or what, exactly? What would be an example of a story on which there are not two sides? […the Holocaust? –ed.] What does LGBT equality mean, even? It’s unclear, beyond the cheering for Obergefell that Smith justified by referring to the standards guide.
What would it even mean to say that there are not two sides on an issue that was literally just decided on a 5-4 vote? How does BuzzFeed explain to its readers what that number four represents?
Not only are those hard-hitting questions about the nature of journalism – I favor ‘Or what, exactly?’ – but I have every reason to believe the dedicated LOLcats fans at Buzzfeed are all waiting, mouths agape, to hear why Ben Smith thought this was at all fair. There are standards, after all, in overseeing a website, especially a clicktastic one running hundreds of thousands of monkey GIFs. I’m not sure how Pat Robertson, or that guy on Cable 709 who calls for stoning fags, can ever trust Ben again. FAIL. Breitbart’s J-professors as well were dismayed by the ethical laxity:
Smith and his site BuzzFeed stepped in it Friday. After the Supreme Court made gay marriage the law of the land across all 50 states, BuzzFeed dropped its pretense as an objective news outlet to openly celebrate the ruling. Like many other left-wing sites, BuzzFeed altered its logo to resemble the anti-Christian gay pride flag.
And Buzzfeed has the nerve to call itself “America’s Newspaper of Record”? Tsk-tsk.
Like I’ve said many times before, Smith goes beyond bias. He’s just a bad, bad guy. Sleazy, unethical… An evil genius.
With that, a bit of context and contrast. The fundamentalist chief administrator of Alabama’s Supreme Court just sent this corrective to the state’s Republican governor, Robert Bentley:
“You’re not standing for the rule of law when you capitulate to a law that defies God and exposes people to the wicked. You’re just a coward making excuses! Or will your conscience cause you to resign?”
The Governor said he had absolutely no choice but to obey the Supreme Court’s ruling. That is obviously wrong.
“Public officials are ministers of God assigned the duty of punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous. You cannot serve two masters: you must pick — God or Satan.”
I don’t imagine this is anything but entirely fine and good by Mollie because of course ‘the law’ requires Biblical scrutiny. Whereas everybody knows ‘journalism’ is a matter of character.