An Example of Bad Journalism
This is the worst case of journalism I’ve ever seen. The purpose of the article is obvious: paint Wal-Mart as big, greedy, evil and naughty-naughty. Let’s analyze what actually is going on.
The contract with Wal-Mart and the lady was that Wal-Mart doesn’t have to pay for your medical expenses if you get someone else to pay them. That makes sense. The CNN report calls that the “fine print”. BS. That’s not “fine print” that’s obvious. You don’t need to have medical expenses paid for twice.
The only reasoning given in this case for the lady (yes, I would say that this reporter tried everything in her power to flex a little influence for the “underdog” in this situation, regardless of the facts or contracts) is that “In 2007, the retail giant reported net sales in the third quarter of $90 billion.”
Read that again. Wal-Mart is a “Giant”. Understood — yet loaded language. Now seriously, go read it. Why was that sentence placed there? To show a comparison between the rich and the poor. Wal-Mart had a single spokesperson represented — the man had tons of ways to make his points, even though HE AGREED THAT WAL-MART WAS RIGHT.
The point of the story? The poor lady might not have a right to the money. She might not “need” it for medical expenses — but daggumit, she’s poor. Wal-Mart’s not. Oh, and Wal-Mart is evil.
Journalism my foot. That’s pure argumentation. Get a blog lady, and leave journalism for journalists.
Remember that you can receive automatic updates of