Defending against defamation

When you defend yourself, it's because you are trying to explain your side as you respond to an attack. In the case of the media, however, it serves the purpose of making their victim look like they are guilty without the benefit of the "alleged" that normally shields more favored causes or favored individuals.

The Canadian Globe and Mail, like the U.S. media, use the technique to validate the accuser and the accusations, without giving the accused a chance to offer counter arguments.

In "U.S. defends AIDS policy amid criticism" they gave the U.S. a shot.

Defending the U.S. administration's policy from intense criticism, U.S. AIDS co-ordinator Randall Tobias said that the United States is spending nearly twice as much to fight global AIDS as the rest of the world's donor governments combined.

What they dont' tell you is the "intense critism" is by AIDS activists who are professional angry protesters and the international community of extortionists and corrupt institutions like the U.N. who are dismayed because their system of kickbacks, bribes, highliving expense accounts, and job patronage is being threatened because they will not be handling the funds in question. It makes them froth at the mouth. AIDS industry is big business to them. Prevention is the last thing they want.