Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Judgment Day Fable
Jeff Zucker of CNN, Dean Baquet of the New York Times, and Martin Baron of the Washington Post are all killed in a tragic accident at a gathering of leading news executives.
They find themselves standing together before shining heavenly gates and a pleasant young man at a desk greets them. “Hello, I am the senior assistant to the admissions committee, and I am here to guide you through the process. Here is your life record which will be the basis upon which you will be evaluated. Please look it over carefully.” He hands each of them an enormous bound stack of hundreds of pages.
Baron reacts angrily: “The first pages are nothing but false horrible accusations!”
Baquet and Zucker also complain that their records also open with terrible falsehoods.
The young man smiles and says, “No problem.” He takes a fresh stack of paper and an ornate feathered quill pen and writes “Retraction” in large letters on the top of each page, copies and edits each offensive item to a retraction page and then carefully adds the pages to the bottom of each man’s record and rebinds each record with an enormous heavenly stapler.
“You can go in and present your life résumés to the committee now.”
Dean Baquet objects. “But the false horrible stuff is still on the top pages. No one is going to read down to the bottom where you put the retractions.”
“Exactly,” said the assistant. “Best of luck in there.”
Published in General
Another fine bit of imagining. You obviously have too much time on your hands. 😁
I imagine pretty fast so it does not take that much time. It’s the reality crap that takes longer to deal with.
Wondering how many likes are based solely on enjoyment of the first sentence alone…
Good point. That is a rather happy one.
Yeah. Excellent hook, too. I bet nobody stops reading after that.
Nice.
Another such story:
In Niven and Pournelle’s modern updating of Dante’s Inferno, two senators are arguing in Hell. One had voted for an ABM missile defense system while the other had voted against it, so how could they both be in the Ninth Circle where traitors are consigned? But the one who voted for it believed it was useless and only supported it because it would funnel money to companies that had contributed to his campaigns, while the other believed it would be effective but voted against it because that was his party’s position. Neither could see that they both had betrayed their constituents, while their colleagues who voted from sincere if mistaken belief were not there with them.