BCT Editorial – 11/26/06

This page was last updated on November 27, 2006.

The answer is; Editorial; Beaver County Times; November 26, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Congratulations are due Hopewell Township’s Breann Vular, who walked away last week from the TV show ‘Who Wants to be a Millionaire’ with $50,000 in her pockets.”

[RWC] Unless the $50,000 is tax free, Ms. Vular didn’t walk away “with $50,000 in her pockets.”

Hold on to your hat. You’ll find the editorial is a “left-handed compliment.”

“The money will go a long way toward her tuition at the University of Pittsburgh, where Vular is a 19-year-old freshman majoring in biology.

[RWC] This is off topic, bit will someone explain why the Times refuses to use titles, as in Miss/Ms. Vular, but insists on spelling out “percent” instead of using “%?”

“Vular had an all-or-nothing chance to double her money, but made the sensible choice to quit while she was ahead when stumped by the following question: ‘In 1954, Martin Luther King Jr. became pastor at the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in what U.S. city?’

“In retrospect, Vular probably wishes she was a little more rounded in the history of the civil rights movement, a subject that would benefit all Americans equally well.

“Think Rosa Parks. Think bus boycott.

“And the $100,000 answer was?

“Montgomery, Ala.”

[RWC] What a sad editorial.

The Times couldn’t be content with congratulating a 19-year-old freshman in her success in answering questions in a pressure-packed situation. And what about Ms. Vular doubling her goal of $25,000 as reported by the Times 10 days ago? Nope, not good enough. Her hometown “newspaper” had to criticize her knowledge of “the history of the civil rights movement.” Does knowing or not where Mr. King became a pastor materially affect a person’s understanding of “the history of the civil rights movement” anymore than knowing George Washington’s birthplace affects your understanding of the American Revolution?

The Times takes a risk throwing rocks when it comes to history. The editorial entitled “‘Trust, but verify’” of November 12^th referred to the “GOP Congress” of 2002. As I pointed out in my critique of that editorial, it was not a “GOP Congress.” Democrats held the majority in the Senate from late-May 2001 until January 2003. The Times criticizes someone for not knowing an irrelevant factoid from 52 years ago, yet can’t get history from only four years ago correct.

One last point. Perhaps Mr. Vular learned everything she was taught. If there’s a problem – and I don’t believe there is, why didn’t the editorial mention her schools/teachers? You get only one guess, but here’s a hint. Ms. Vular graduated from a government run high school.