In my wanderings yesterday on world wide web, I came upon this item at Media Matters that I found of interest: Glenn Beck just makes things up about Smithsonian exhibit. What is so typical about these stories is that I learned about something I didn't know existed: the show Hide/Seek: Difference and Desire in American Portraiture at the National Portrait Gallery.
I haven't seen the show, of course, and my bet is that Glenn Beck hasn't either, but that hasn't stopped him from railing about, as Media Matters notes:
Perfect storm. Eroding values. Hard work, sacrifice, thrift, honor, truth, God. As a nation born out of faith in God, how's that going today, huh? Twenty-five percent of those under 30 years of age describe their religion as atheist, agnostic, or nothing in particular. Now, as you get older, it goes down. Thirty to 40 years old, only 19 percent. Ages 40 to 50, 15 percent. If you're over 60, less than 10 percent say that.
And then you have the tax dollars funding this wonderful art display. It's Christmas at the Smithsonian. Here's this wonderful -- oh, look, it's Jesus with ants on him. They describe it as the first major exhibition to focus on the sexual difference in the making of modern American portraiture.
What? You got to be kidding me, right? What does this have to do with the birth of the baby Jesus, and why is he now covered in ants? Whose values are these? And you wonder why there's the breakdown of the family.
But as Media Matters explains, the funding for the show is made up entirely of private donations. NO tax dollars were used to stage this exhibition, which is admittedly challenging to some viewers - one piece is a video of Jesus on a crucifix crawling with ants.
So it was interest this evening, as I prepared supper for the family, to hear their piece about the show on NPR. I listened closely, but didn't hear the reporter, Elizabeth Blair, mention that only private funds were used to put on the exhibit, albeit in a government building.
So I called Blair, and left a message saying that I may have missed the mention of the private funding, and left my contact info, not thinking that she would call me back.
But she did.
And herein lies the tale. Blair first admitted that she knew the show was privately funded, but didn't think that fact was important to the story. I argued that the slant of the piece, with the quotes she presented from Reps. John Boehner and Eric Cantor ("an outrageous use of taxpayer money."), led listeners to think that it was put on with public monies.
But, but---the National Portrait Gallery is a public building, she said. Who cares, I replied - the fact that private money was used to stage the exhibition is a fact, and should have been made known to your listeners.
Blair then claimed that she only had 3.5 minutes for the piece, and couldn't fit that news in.
Really? (You'll have no problem imagining the incredulity in my voice.)
Blair then had this corker:
"I've been doing this a long time."
"Does that mean you never make a mistake?" I asked.
"I didn't make a mistake," Blair said.
It was a remarkable conversation that left me so engaged that I called the NPR editors to explain why the omission of nine words ("only private funds were used to stage the exhibit"), when coupled with the quotes of outraged opponents, could lead many listeners to a false conclusion.
Unless, of course, this is where NPR now finds itself: totin' that heavy water of false outrage for Republicans who hate them anyway.