[Speed Gibson,
Thursday November 24, 2005 at 2:05pm]
Presenting both sides
In today's Minneapolis Star Tribune Business section is a splashy profile of two documentaries on Wal-Mart. Both available on DVD, one pro, one con, the writer gives a tale of the tape on seven points. This would seem to be a fair treatment by the Strib, but is it really? Let's see.
These documentaries are presented as equals, but there is no substance to the "The High Cost of Low Prices" documentary. It's nothing but an interview here and there. In a country this large, profiling an employer this large, you can always find a disgruntled worker, competitor, or politician to make these points. The "Why Wal-Mart Works and Why That Makes Some People C-R-A-Z-Y" documentary uses some but also has some general, verifiable facts and expert testimony to back its claims.
To cover unequal sides as equals is not good journalism; this is bias. A good journalist would make a dispassionate observation that one side made no case. Even if true, what's to be done that doesn't involve guns (to enforce restrictive laws) and lowers our standard of living?
| ISSUE | Pro | Con |
| Health Care | Facts: 50 percent participate, better plan than many retailers offer | Anecdote |
| Cinematography | Relies on economists, not gimmicks | Heart-tugging shots of closed competitors |
| Globalization | Fact: it lowers prices. | Anecdote |
| Worker Testimonials | Anecdote | Anecdote |
| Perspective | Fact: makes 3 cents per $100 in sales | Anecdote |
| Small towns | Anecdote | Anecdote |
| Human Dignity | Quotes socialogist favorably | Anecdote |
These documentaries are presented as equals, but there is no substance to the "The High Cost of Low Prices" documentary. It's nothing but an interview here and there. In a country this large, profiling an employer this large, you can always find a disgruntled worker, competitor, or politician to make these points. The "Why Wal-Mart Works and Why That Makes Some People C-R-A-Z-Y" documentary uses some but also has some general, verifiable facts and expert testimony to back its claims.
To cover unequal sides as equals is not good journalism; this is bias. A good journalist would make a dispassionate observation that one side made no case. Even if true, what's to be done that doesn't involve guns (to enforce restrictive laws) and lowers our standard of living?