Written by: Beck

The Tulsa World sent a nasty-gram to blogger BatesLine for excerpting from one of its articles. They assert that his excerpt was a violation of copyright laws (it's not--it falls under fair-use statues), and they further demanded he remove links to their site (which, I'd love to see how they justify that). So, in a show of solidarity, I've decided to link Tulsa World, excerpt from one of their articles, and say something generally unpleasant about them. Here goes:

The people at Tulsa World seem to be radically opposed to bio-engineering technology which could alleviate starvation in the world. As such, can there be doubt that Tulsa World wants poor children to starve to death?

I say this because of Tulsa World article Farm Scene: State legislatures struggling with issue of engineered varieties of wheat, which begins with the seemingly innocuous paragraph:

Months after a company uprooted and destroyed a variety of wheat strengthened by genetics, some farm-country legislatures are debating the conditions under which engineered wheat can be used.

I reach my conclusions about Tulsa World's bias because in the second paragraph, Tulsa World first gives the arguments of opponents of genetically modified crops (whom they cast in a positive light by labeling them "proponents of such legislation") before giving arguments of those who favor GM food (labeled with the negatively connoted word "critics").

Granted, those are extremely loose grounds on which to base a conclusion that Tulsa World wants poor children to starve to death, but I think you have to read between the lines to get at the article author's true thoughts.

(Hat tip: Ace)