On Tuesday, Public Eye, The San Diego Union-Tribune’s humorous column that pokes fun at celebrities and odd events, cited a report that, according to German researchers, “natural blondes will become extinct within 200 years.” The only fair-haired people remaining would be bottle blondes, according to the item.
It was a hoax. Somehow, the bogus report made it into the British media and was picked up in this country. In addition to the mention in Public Eye, the New York Post and other newspapers, the story was reported as fact on CNN, CBS, ABC and local television.
The same day the Union-Tribune attributed the information to unnamed German scientists, the World Health Organization, cited as the source in other reports, said it had never conducted research on this subject and knows of no such reports issued by the organization.
The next day, The New York Times and The Washington Post poked fun at bogus stories on the report and the media’s gullibility. As the Post put it, “it was a dark day on the hair color front.” In fact, it was a dark day on the journalistic front.
A retraction of sorts appeared in Friday’s Public Eye in the Currents section. How did the item make its way into the Union-Tribune? It turns out it wasn’t based on a report by a news service. The chagrined writer said he found the information on the BBC Web site. Although Public Eye takes a light approach, the Union-Tribune does not knowingly report fabricated items as fact.
The BBC story said that researchers “predict the last truly natural blonde will be born in Finland the country with the highest proportion of blondes.” It also pointed out that blondes may disappear because “blonde hair is caused by a recessive gene.”
The BBC made an attempt to introduce a scientific opinion, which should have prompted others to dig a little deeper. It quoted a professor who said the frequency of blondes might drop “but they won’t disappear.” He also explained that genes don’t disappear unless “there is a disadvantage. . . . ”
Journalists of all hair colors should have applied some skepticism to this. It was the ultimate blonde joke, but this time, the targets, regardless of their hair color, were journalists.
A reader was baffled by the presence on the front page Sept. 27 of a story that said Macy’s is making over its Fashion Valley store and 41 other outlets to accommodate shopping carts. June Crosby questioned why the article shared the front page with a story on the possibility of military force in Iraq.
She also questioned why a photo of a shopping cart appeared on the front page while a photo of President Bush appeared inside the paper, on the same page with the continuation of the Iraq story.
In her view, the Union-Tribune all too often “buries a picture of the president” in the back of the paper. “Why is this? Is the issue with Macy’s shopping carts more important?”
Photos of President Bush are nothing new to this newspaper. Neither are stories about the drumbeat for war in Iraq. In fact, on Thursday, a 6-by 8-inch picture of the president and a bipartisan group of lawmakers appeared on the front page, above the fold, and dominated the page.
The photo that showed a shopping cart Sept. 27 was below the fold and measured 4 by 41/4 inches. The dominant front-page photo that day was of a Louisiana woman watching floodwaters destroy her business. The photo of the president inside the paper that day measured 41/4 by 71/2 inches.
The story about Macy’s signalled a major change in lifestyle, a trend that will affect lives of readers who shop at department stores. While not as significant as the possibility of war, it certainly was of interest to readers.
Michael Pitts, vice president for spiritual development and chaplain at Point Loma Nazarene University, was pleased to see the Sept. 29 article about the attraction of the seaside university for students who surf.
But there was one flaw. The article referred to students’ “fundamentalist Christian beliefs.”
“For 100 years Point Loma Nazarene University has been committed to providing students with an academically rigorous liberal arts education rooted in the Christian tradition,” the chaplain wrote.
“Having a campus on Sunset Cliffs does indeed afford . . . students who enjoy surfing an unparalleled opportunity to do so while pursuing their education. However, I thought it was unfortunate that the writer chose ‘fundamentalist’ when describing the Christian beliefs that form our foundation. That term is not only inaccurate, it might be considered by some as disparaging. I believe just saying ‘Christian’ would have been better.”
He’s right. Union-Tribune style, based on The Associated Press stylebook, notes the term can be pejorative and suggests it not be used unless a group applies it to itself.
