Fun with Subordinate Clauses

Many linked to this Washington Post article from yesterday:

The Bush administration more than doubled its financial commitment yesterday to provide relief to nations suffering from the Indian Ocean tsunami, amid complaints that the vacationing President Bush has been insensitive to a humanitarian catastrophe of epic proportions.

Yesterday on NPR an item had this in its opening paragraph:

The Bush administration, under pressure to do more, said it is sending military assets and trying to better coordinate with other donors in the region.

Ah yes, it's our friend the subordinate clause. As one online grammar site has it,

It does not express a complete thought, so it does not stand alone. It must always be attached to a main clause that completes the meaning.

So true. You'll note that in both quoted news items above, the reporters aren't saying that Bush increased aid to the Indian Ocean region because of complaints or pressure, only that these things existed at the time that he did so. So if you leave these stories thinking that the president only ever intended to donate $15 million to relief efforts until forced to do more by pressure or complaints, well it's your own fault. Correlation doesn't imply causation you know.

Let's try this with the Washington Post and NPR.

Aware that NPR has been accused of biased reporting yet manages to remain on the air, NPR's Michele Kelemen uses subordinate clauses to report the news.

See? It's all perfectly true. The causation is all in your mind. Like the spoon.

John F. Harris and Robin Wright, Washington Post staff writers, under the unspoken threat of being fired, filed their story yesterday.

What part of that isn't true?

Slander being very difficult to prove, the Washington Post prints the news at it sees fit.

I defy you to call that misleading!

Amid accusations that it is anti-semitic, NPR chose to air several reports concerning Hannukah.

And so on.

In a political atmosphere where a dishonorable discharge would almost certainly ruin any chances for the presidency, John Kerry declined to release all of his military records.

And for the other side:

Under pressure from civil rights groups, George Bush nominated the first African-American female Secretary of State.

The point of course is that what subordinate clauses the reporter chooses to attach to which independent clauses is completely a judgement call. Even where the reporter is interested in giving us a "complete picture", as she sees it, these subordinate elements could have been included in the story as separate paragraphs later in the story. Yes, they would have far less impact on the main piece of information in the story. So how much impact should they have? It's the reporter's call.

There really is no such thing as unbiased journalism. It's simply not possible.

Update: Michael J. Totten is having some similar fun with headlines.

Update: I just thought of a good one:

Pedophilia being illegal in his jurisdiction, Washington Post reporter John F. Harris married an adult.

Hah. These could get pretty funny. Though I don't know that Harris is in fact married.

Update: Mike at Cold Fury has some strong comments on the WaPo story.

Update: More press shenanigans here.