Hering Still Makes No Sense

I've got it!

Hasso Hering is to the D-H as the WSJ Editorial page is to the rest of the paper: While the DH does a pretty good job of reporting the news, Hering writes editorials that bear absolutely no resemblance to reality. Constantly.

First up:

Lawmakers enacted Senate Bill 492 in order to provide some oversight, medical and otherwise, for “mixed martial arts.” This is a form of fighting in which two contestants try to subdue each other any way they can and where one man is seen to squat on top of the other more often than appears seemly.

Yup, he's basically talking about The Octagon. And you know what? For once, I agree with the guy. My libertarian impulse does not extend to the right of people to beat each other senseless - or, what I find more horrifying, that people get a kick out of it.

On the other hand, Hasso is apparently physically disgusted by the thought of two men in an intimate position. Hasso, I have some friends you should meet....

Next up - and this follows way too nicely from the last editorial - Hering on domestic partnership laws:

A Portland judge has just decided a lawsuit in favor of two women, a gay couple who are raising two children. The facts of the case show why Oregon law has been behind the times and needs to be updated with the domestic partnership bill passed this year.

Wait! What?! Hering is coming out in favor of domestic partnerships? No frackin' way....

Oregon voters have said, correctly, that unrelated adults of the same sex cannot marry. But that still left the need for formalizing other types of households where children are in need of stability in the form of adults legally responsible for them. The legislature answered that need with the domestic partnership bill.

Among opponents of homosexual unions, there’s resentment of the partnership law. But let these opponents consider the children, children who have been and will be born into new and unconventional circumstances whether anybody likes it or not. These children are better off if they can have two parents who are legally responsible for them rather than just one.

Oh. Never mind. He still can't stand Teh Gay, but as long as it's for the children, then he's buying...especially if the parents are unmarried heterosexual couples.

I'd give the guy credit for swallowing his disgust for two seconds in favor of his view of the greater good, but someone should tell him that journalists aren't supposed to use the term "heterosexual" anymore to describe human beings. There's a lot of negative stigma attached to that word.

Then again, maybe that's why Hasso decided to use it. And yes, I know it's an editorial, but I believe the style guide still stands (unless it's being broken on purpose) and just because it's an editorial doesn't give the author the right to be mmalicious.

And finally, my personal favorite, Hering on a recent change in Oregon law that allows colleges and high schools more freedom from institutional censorship:

Under the new law, students contributing to “school-sponsored media” have complete “freedom of the press” even though they have none of the accountability that goes along with it.

If legislators and the governor think that’s what is meant by freedom of speech and press, they are misinformed.

Hering is referencing something a high-school journalist apparently wrote:

“The bond issue is coming up again, and you better make your parents vote for it. The stupid and ignorant people in this town have voted it down before. Make sure they crawl out of their caves and see the light this time. Tell them there will be hell to pay if it goes down again and we have to suffer through another year with these shabby facilities. We are the future, and we deserve decent buildings.”

First off: I think the writing in question lacks tact. There's not really much of an argument for it's quality. But - and this is the key point - IT WAS HIGH SCHOOL. If there's ever a place to make mistakes in journalism, that is it.

Second, I think there's a nasty power issue here: A 'real' newspaper editor effectively calling a HS newspaper editorial stupid is not cool. There are a billion better ways that Hering could have handled this, starting with going to the high school and asking the students in question why they thought it was a good idea without judging them in front of the entire readership of the DH.

Third, I suspect the writing in question here would have been allowed by the principal even before the new law took effect. Poor writing is not worthy of censorship.

And finally, this is a great case of the pot calling the kettle black. Hering writes malicious crap all the time, and since a 'professional' has no oversight beyond the publisher, he gets away with it.

Let me quote this passage again:

Under the new law, students contributing to “school-sponsored media” have complete “freedom of the press” even though they have none of the accountability that goes along with it.

For all intents and purposes, Hering has a lot less accountability than the HS students. Put charitably, Hering tried to shoot himself in the foot...and missed.

P.S. As poorly worded as the students' editorial is - and here I agree with Hering that the editorial is probably going to cause less, not more, people to vote for the bond - the students are correct in their argument. I've gone to schools that desperately needed bond measures only to have the voters of the district turn them down repeatedly, and getting angry is a perfectly valid and legitimate response to the community turning its back on you. There are better ways to communicate one's anger than this, that's all.