It's great to think that the people who influence the country, including the president, the supreme court justices and congressmen are all human beings. Articles that shed light on their home lives are sometimes interesting and offer insight to these people who dictate what is and isn't acceptable in our lives. And sometimes, it's in appropriate.
In an article published on MSNBC.com, the Associated Press reports that the supreme court is struggling with the Federal Communications Commission's policy regarding the use of vulgarities on television during daytime hours when children may be watching. While this is an important issue and the supreme court justice's personal lives may influence whether they agree with the bans the FCC wants, the article about the bans explained more about the justices than the ban itself.
There is no explain about how exactly they would ban the vulgarities or what would happen to shows that do not comply or if a celebrity slips up on live television. Instead, the article talks about Chief Justice John Roberts' three young children and Justice Antonio Scalia's more than 20 grandchildren. And wouldn't you know it mentions nothing about the three tight-lipped justices' families. Do they have them? Or are they just inhuman because they don't believe in the ban? We don't know.
Instead of trying to guess how the justices will vote based on the number of children and grandchildren have, maybe the journalists should explore the ban itself and what it would mean for television. Then we'd have an article.
Rating: Marooned on an island
Link: Supreme Court whatttt?
No comments:
Post a Comment