I know I said I couldn't post today. I had a routine medical test that involved sedation, so I figured I would lounge around for the rest of the day with no guilt. But here I am reading the Washington Post and who pops up but Edmund Andrews.
The finance writer, Michelle Singletary, has a review of his much-reviewed book, Busted. OK. Whatever.
What I now find most interesting about this fellow and his book is not the content, or even the author, but the way that the mainstream media protects its own by not asking the real questions. So here is Singletary on the notorious omitted bankruptcies.
Unfortunately, a rather regrettable omission mars this intriguing personal account. Andrews failed to mention that his wife had filed for bankruptcy - twice. She filed once to get out from under debt accumulated because of her failed first marriage and a second time to again shed debt amassed while raising four children as a single mother with little, if any, child support.
Honestly, I would zap this if it were turned in to me in an undergraduate writing course. First marginal zap: "Why 'rather'? Why are you lessening the omission with your language?" Second marginal zap: "Re: 'She filed once to get out from under debt accumulated BECAUSE of her failed first marriage': Why the BECAUSE? Isn't the appropriate word DURING? What evidence have you provided to show that her first marriage caused the bankruptcy?" Third marginal zap: "Re: 'a second time to again shed debt amassed while raising four children as a single mother, with little, if any, child support.' How come you left out the fact that this bankruptcy involved discharging a $30,000 debt to wife's SISTER and around $20,000 of other debt to doctors and vets and others?"
Singletary used Andrews's own excuses (presented to NPR as I recall) as her text. So much for doing research. Using someone's own excuses is akin to my occasional run-in with plagiarism. I copy the source of the plagiarized paper. Call the student in for an unpleasant meeting. Show student the source and the work handed in to me. almost without exception, the student denies the plagiarism; it is a coincidence. Whatever. I suppose the Washington Post writer would say, "Oh. OK." And give the student an A. Or a B.