With so many important subjects to report, I don’t understand why The Associated Press would bother writing a story about whether Sen. George Allen used a racial slur in college.
First, I won’t defend Allen as a senator or possible presidential candidate. For the most part, Republicans (and Democrats) don’t deserve defending because they’re usually concerned with getting power.
However, because The AP provides articles to about 1,700 newspapers, the agency shouldn’t waste time with speculative and innocuous reports. When a news organization holds that much influence, it should take its job more seriously than a common tabloid.
The meaningless controversy started when Dr. Ken Shelton, a radiologist and former college football teammate of Allen, claimed the senator used racial slurs during college. According to Shelton, Allen only used the “N-word” around whites, though.
Furthermore, Shelton said Allen shoved the severed head of a deer into the mailbox of a black family. As if to add credence to this story, Shelton said: “This was just after the movie ‘The Godfather’ came out with the severed horse’s head in the bed.”
Naturally, Allen denied the allegations: “The story and his comments and assertions in there are completely false.” Then Doug Jones, a former college roommate of Shelton, backed up Allen: “I never heard George Allen use any racially disparaging word nor did I ever witness or hear about him acting in a racially insensitive manner.”
All of this appeared in an AP article. And it’s almost indefensible as news material.
The main problem with the story is the dedication to hearsay. In other words, the article doesn’t rely on any known facts. It’s a pointless and powerless exercise in “he said, but he said.” If a news article has no truth-just contradicting statements about something that doesn’t matter-the reporter has failed the reader.
So why would The AP bother with this garbage? In order to answer this question, one has to stop assuming The AP is a responsible news organization.
Sen. Allen recently faced scrutiny for referring to an Indian campaign volunteer as “Macaca.” The term can be considered racist, but Allen said he didn’t know that. Disregarding Allen’s allegiance to a ridiculous political party, I can’t think of a reason why a senator would knowingly jeopardize his position in Congress.
But that’s not the point. The AP possibly reported this story about Allen’s racism in college to cater to fans of gossip and rumor. The reasoning is “Hey, this guy has already dealt with charges of racism. Let’s focus a new allegation that has no proof to capitalize on this hot topic.”
Another explanation could illuminate The AP’s reasoning. Shelton’s comments originally appeared in a Salon.com article, and perhaps The AP wanted to give Allen a fair chance to respond.
Even though this possibility could almost cleanse The AP for its choice, the logic still falls short for a couple of reasons.
First, if you analyze the article at Salon.com, you can still see the information is based on hearsay. True, the article mentions two other teammates who said Allen used the “N-word,” but the sources were anonymous. We don’t know if these sources are real people.
Second, in the same article, seven other teammates said they didn’t think Allen was racist. Yet when three people say otherwise, Salon.com places their comments at the top of the story, a decision that raises suspicion of bias. The AP story is only giving more credence to hearsay and unprofessional outlets like Salon.com, which sounds more like a Web site about blowdryers and curlers.
A videotape proves that Allen referred to someone as “Macaca.” Therefore, a news organization has a right to clarify or report the event.
But when all we have is bare words-probably motivated by political bias-forget it. The AP failed readers, journalism and God himself when it released the story about Allen’s possible racial slurs in college.