My ten year old son noticed the bias in Scholastic News, and brought their January 31 issue to me out of his concern. I found similar stories about war against Iraq on their website.



Much of the information that they provide is true, or is mostly true. However, they frequently leave out important parts of the story, thus leaving a wrong impression about the issues.



They mention the embargo, for example, and they mention some of its negative impact. But they don't mention the United Nations UNICEF report that hundreds of thousands of children have died because of the embargo.



They mention plans for military action against Iraq, but fail to mention that many thousands of civilian casualties are likely.



There is no discussion of plans to destroy water systems, nor of plans to employ our own weapons of mass destruction against Iraq, nor of the depleted uranium issue, nor of the constant attacks by our aircraft against Iraqi targets over the past eleven years.



They mention "growing support for overthrowing Hussein," when the opposite seems to be the truth-- at least, as far as U.S. military action is concerned.



I couldn't find any mention of anti-war activists' beliefs that the pending invasion of Iraq is for empire-building, or an oil-grab.



They don't mention the anti-war movement at all; Congressional criticism is described as resulting from being left out of the war planning.



Here are a couple of links to their Iraq coverage:



http://teacher.scholastic.com/scholasticnews/indepth/iraq/gulf_war.htm



http://teacher.scholastic.com/scholasticnews/indepth/iraq/kids_in_iraq.htm



Please check these and the other linked stories carefully, and provide feedback if you agree that they should provide more balance. Calm, reasoned, and specific feedback about a particular issue on a particular page will be the most productive, I think. If enough of us respond, we can cover all the important issues.



Here is their contact form:



http://www.scholastic.com/custsupport/pcomment.asp



If you are a parent of school-age children, mention that.



best wishes,

richard in Denver

I don't like the idea that it doesn't promote peace. It concerns me that children are taught to handle problems that way, "you had better do this or we'll blast you," type theories. However, at least it mentioned something about opposition in the UN. Is this required reading?

I don't see how these stories are any different than those found in the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Washington Post, or Wall Street Journal. The only difference is that these are written for children. I remember getting those when I was in elementary school, but I never paid any attention to them. Children are less likely to conform to something they read and more likely to develope convictions based on what their parents believe and teach them. Besides, is the corporate media really going to let the whole truth get out to our children when they are at their most susceptible? Probably not...they need to sign up for selective services in eight years.

>>> I couldn't find any mention of anti-war activists' beliefs that the pending invasion of Iraq is for empire-building, or an oil-grab. They don't mention the anti-war movement at all; Congressional criticism is described as resulting from being left out of the war planning.

That's good, sounds like that particular school hasn't been taken over by left wing loonies. Sounds like they've got intelligent adult supervision at that school.

These folks have it right. Up in the Bay Area, it's all the age of Aquarius, not planet Earth.

Government, frequently misnamed "Public", Schools exist to further the ends of the government - not to provide a solid Liberal Arts Education. They are more properly called Indoctrination Centers. If you have kids it is your responsibility as a parent to see to their education and not just "go limp" and assume that the school will educate your child for you. It would be nice if it were otherwise but it is not.

Funding for libraries is being starved.

At the height of the depression libraries

were maintained unlike nowadays as hours

staff and resources are minimal.

Well, if you funded libraries and kept them open at convenient hours then the commoners might start thinking for themselves.

They might even stop watching their television.