Flowers’ column on sex abuse flawed

What makes a good oped? Op-ed stands for “Opposite the editorial page.” Editorials are reserved for a news outlet’s paid editorial staff. Whereas an op-ed is often written by other paid staff, a guest, or a regular columnist. Regardless it is all opinion.

Opinions are neither good nor bad. We know the phrase: “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.” Regardless, nobody is entitled to their own facts. And while we cannot judge any opinion as good or bad, we can judge whether an opinion is informed. In other words, does the opinion flow from a premise of generally observable and agreed-upon fact? Or is the opinion based on opinion, which may be based on further opinion, supposition, and speculation?

One opinion that is not informed is Christine Flowers’ opinion (Daily Local News, Feb. 3, 2021) that “Some sex-abuse claims don’t deserve to be heard.” On its face, the conclusion is absurd.

Nevertheless, I was intrigued, and I read the piece, giving the author the benefit of the doubt by investing my time. Against the backdrop of the seditious and insurrectionist mob on January 6 at the US Capitol (a place I’ve worked at for a time) and the genuine fear that many had for their lives, Ms. Flowers decided to aim her pen at Rep. Ocosio-Cortez (AOC)? What happened that day was a national tragedy.

But it was also a very personal tragedy for those who were there. Regardless of how AOC described it on Instagram and whether it is 100 percent, 90 percent, or conforms to some other measure of accuracy, what does that have to do with the general assertion that some sex-abuse claims do not deserve to be heard? Answer: nothing. If attorney Flowers thinks AOC is just making it up or being a political opportunist, where’s the proof? Ms. Flowers’ op-ed proceeds as if her opinion is fact because it is opinion built on opinion and supposition built on supposition. Eventually, Ms. Flowers brings Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh into the fray. That is when it became abundantly clear the op-ed is nothing more than a political rant that is hardly unique and hardly original and consequently, does not inform. It is not unique with what we see nationally.

It is not unique with what we see in this news outlet’s opinion page, which is increasingly becoming less serious and more like Facebook. The political rant was further impaired by the lack of a coherent argument that was not based on a solid foundation of fact.

Without fact, an opinion is nothing more than word salad. We should be able to expect more from a professional news organization. That is what blogs, Facebook, and social media in general are for.

When there is a lack of originality or words, we often see hyperbole. And with hyperbole, comes emotion. And with emotion, frustration may take hold when people do not agree with your views. That is what got Ms. Flowers clipped from the Inquirer after 17 years in March 2020 (https:// www.phillymag.com/ news/2020/03/06/christine-flowers-fired-inquirer/) and she’s going down that same road with this news outlet.

An op-ed is not supposed to be a personal soapbox to rant and riff about anything one is thinking about, based on whatever one is thinking about, regardless of whether such thoughts are based on fact. An op-ed’s purpose is to inform by sharing a unique perspective on a subject matter by a subject matter expert. If an op-ed does not do that, what good is it? If all you want is confirmation bias, that is what social media is for. Professional news organizations need to be better than that.

John Petersen