Mercury News spins again

Yesterday, the Mercury News ran front-page story alleging a big gender split on the war to liberate Iraq. As some stats buried after the jump made clear, there isn’t a gender split: both men and women support the liberation by big margins. The story, of course, was written by the reporter who does all the … Continue reading “Mercury News spins again”

Yesterday, the Mercury News ran front-page story alleging a big gender split on the war to liberate Iraq. As some stats buried after the jump made clear, there isn’t a gender split: both men and women support the liberation by big margins. The story, of course, was written by the reporter who does all the battered women stories. One alert reader took the paper for task in the letters section today:

No gender `split’ on the war

A Mercury News anti-war headline (Page 1A, March 3) blares out: “Gender split on war — With invasion of Iraq looming, women emerge at forefront of peace movement.” But when you actually read the statistics, it turns out that 63 percent of women favor military action in Iraq (as opposed to 73 percent of men).

There is no headline story here. Your readers are quite familiar with your editorial board’s position on the war. Keep it in the opinion section, not on the front page.

Scott Abramson
San Mateo

The table showing the poll numbers Abramson cites wasn’t in the on-line edition of the paper, and it didn’t show undecideds either. On all polls concerning international events, more women than men are undecided, and that’s the only gender split on this issue.

One thought on “Mercury News spins again”

  1. Everybody knows that women are far more caring and nurturing and gentle and frail than men, so of course they would oppose war.

    It only makes sense, right?

Comments are closed.