Sunday, 25 April 2010

New York Times' Hypocrisy

Since this is Sunday morning and the world famous Mitchell Library in Glasgow is shut, I had to revert to Google and Wikipedia to learn that the definition of "hypocrisy" is: "the act of persistently professing beliefs, opinions, virtues, feelings, qualities, or standards that are inconsistent with one's actions. Hypocrisy is thus a kind of lie."

I refer you to the New York Times' recent abuse of the Catholic Church in general and our beloved Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI in particular.

Living witnesses uninterviewed; documents in languages other than English untranslated; time lines unexplored; opinion vouchedsafe as fact. Everything that would under normal circumstances merit the sack jimmied on to the front page.

And yet today I read:

"April 24, 2010, 2:58 PM
Criminal Charges Possible in the Case of the Lost iPhone
By NICK BILTON"

However all due respect was accorded the United States legal system:

"According to people familiar with the investigation, who would not speak on the record because of the potential legal case..."

"Gawker’s chief operating officer, said via e-mail late Friday that the organization had not been contacted by law enforcement officials, and declined to speak further on any legal aspects. Apple also declined to comment."

What happened to respect for the legal case when the Catholic Church was a party to both potential and active legal actions?