by Locker Room contributor
An article in today?s Greensboro News and Record is a textbook example of how allegedly objective reporters can sneak their own (uninformed) opinions and analysis into a straightforward news story. Reporting on a law suit by retailers who are attempting to stop a new round of quotas on imported textiles, staff writer Donald Paterson opens his article by stating ?The U.S. textile industry hit a potentially devastating roadblock Wednesday in its effort to head off a flood of job-robbing imports from China beginning next year.? Job robbing? Interesting assertion (insertion) of opinion, and a stupid one at that. What about the jobs that might be lost in the retail industry because of higher prices? What about the jobs created because consumers will be spending less on textile products and therefore have more to spend on other things? Later on in the article Paterson concludes, ?When quotas expire, China is expected to?flood the United States with cheap imports? (he likes this word ?flood?). If this is not loaded, and inaccurate, language meant go convey an opinion I don?t know what is. Note the use of the normative term ?cheap,? which can apply to both price and quality, rather than ?less expensive? which is clearly more accurate. And how about ?flood the United States? rather than ?provide American consumers with.? Gee, can we tell which side of this lawsuit Mr. Paterson on?