Call me late to the party. Naïve. Slow. Head-in-sand. Mr. Skeptic. Mr. Cynical. Whatever title fits me. But I used to think that Main Stream Media (MSM) was just in the shock-jock, ‘if it bleeds, it leads’, seller of sensationalism, anything for viewers, business. I thought that due to bad news getting more viewers, hence bigger advertising dollars, that was what we were subjected to. ‘Dog bites man’ simply isn’t captivating enough of a story to keep an audience. I also thought that calling MSM ‘enemy of the State’, ‘Mouth Piece of the Democrat Party’, ‘Instigator of unrest’, and the like were all exaggerations and hyperbole. But recent events have changed my mind, woken me up, or whatever epiphany you’d like to use. In retrospect, I am coming closer to the Evan Sayet view of MSM: they are wrong, and intentionally so, for decades! Let’s dig.
Let’s visit the media of the past. I don’t mean as far back as town criers, or when pamphlets, leaflets, and a few newspapers were the only method of sharing news—although those methods almost undoubtedly greatly contributed to the forming of the USA. We don’t even need to go back to the newsreels prior to the movies of the day, back in WWII—even though that ‘news’ was likely more pro-war propaganda than events of the day. I’m thinking more of news after the dawn of television. Back when there were only 3 or 4 channels, and ‘news’ was a half-hour or a full hour. In those days, point of view simply wasn’t a driving force. Report what happened that day, in a somber but serious voice, by broadcasters that were considered as the utmost in integrity. Huntley and Brinkley, Cronkite and other household names that were just trusted. There was a distinct difference between ‘news’ and ‘opinion’. ‘Crossfire’ was never promoted as a ‘news’ program, and Walter Cronkite never gave his personal opinions on anything during his ‘news’ broadcasts. Newspapers in that time made the same distinctions: Page 1 headlines were NEWS, opinions were delegated to the Opinions section, and never the twain shall meet. Maybe my view of back then is poorly colored by time. Maybe I really was just naïve.
Fast forward to the late 1960s. The Vietnam War was on everyone’s mind, and on everyone’s TV—that was the first televised military conflict. It may be a chicken/egg thing of which came first: negative public opinion of the US at war, or the negative news coverage of it. The results are unquestioned: college campuses became flash-points of protests, college-age people were plotting their plans to defect to Canada, and the general public opinion of our government and ‘their’ war was at record lows, possibly as low as the 1860s. Eventually, public opinion, either reflected by or influenced by media, pushed foreign policy to end that war. By 1975, President Nixon had removed all US troops from the region, ending our involvement there. The human disaster that ensued, in Cambodia and Vietnam aside, the news media got their first taste of changing governmental policy. Journalism students’ goals went from ‘reporting the news honestly’ to ‘changing the world!’ overnight. And Journalism schools are not noted for creating Conservative graduates.
At the very same time (mid to late 1960s), the Civil Rights movement was gaining momentum and newsworthiness. Obvious terrible legal and societal discrepancies were correctly highlighted and emphasized. Rarely a day went by without a Civil Rights march appearing on the evening news. It was impossible for an everyday American to ignore the issue—it was RIGHT THERE for everyone to see, and decide upon. The media’s role in advancing the cause was as important as the politicians that ushered in appropriate, needed legislation.
To add gasoline to that particular fire, the Watergate Scandal happened. I won’t expound upon the scandal itself, as many books and movies are available to do that. But the change in the media’s role, from informer to influencer, cannot be overstated—heck, they TOOK DOWN a Republican President! Even back then, the media was generally to the Left of the GOP, so they felt like they defeated an opponent! The Washington Post, knee-deep in Watergate, and the New York Times, began to blur the lines of news and opinion pieces at this time. The trend is unchanged to this day. Front page ‘news’ items can now appear in either paper, containing no facts, but declaring the opinion of the writer as such.
Next in line were the parallel creations of cable/satellite TV, CNN, and widespread Internet usage. For the first time, news was no longer an hour-a-day thing, but 24 hours. How to fill those hours where nothing momentous happened? The rise of opinion-based programming was probably inevitable. And their Left-of-center view was just as likely. The internet, along with a very few non-liberal news outlets, disrupted the news monopoly enjoyed by the Big Three Networks (ABC, NBC, and CBS). Facts could hit the internet unscreened by the usual networks! Differing opinions found voices online and on the newly created Fox News Channel—which likely would not have happened without the advent of cable and internet. And some of the differing outlets were pulling the assumed cover of legitimacy off of the old networks’ sources, views, and stories. See: Dan Rather. In effect, just because it is on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Washington Post, or New York Times, doesn’t mean it is accurate or true. Monopoly broken.
Now fast-forward to current day. It is estimated that over 90% of newsroom personnel nationwide are registered Democrats. While that does not guarantee point of view slanting, it can’t help but influence it. Fox News Channel became a HUGE thing, just because it DIDN’T promote the typical news network views! That FNC completely overtook and continues to win ratings battles for cable news is the subject of another writing. But having alternative sources for data and stories sheds light on stories traditional media may not even cover, or may glance over, that many consumers think are quite important.
I mentioned Evan Sayet in the opening of this piece. His view: “The media have gotten every major story WRONG for the last 50 years.” From the impact of the US leaving Vietnam, to the collapse of the Soviet Union, to 9/11, to the Economic impacts of virtually anything. They haven’t been just a little wrong. As Sayet says, “They have been as wrong as wrong can be.” And Sayet is correct. But current media has taken wrong into overdrive, which is the impetus for this writing. For years, the MSM has been breathlessly reporting on the fall of the Trump administration. From Russia collusion, to the Mueller Probe, to Stormy Daniels, to Michael Flynn, to Impeachment, the MSM has been predicting the NEXT BIG THING will lead to President Trump being removed from office, and most of his staff in prison. Except none of that happened. Mueller couldn’t find wrongdoing to pin on Trump, even after two years and $30M of investigating every aspect of Trump’s life (In fact, as things come to light, they may have overstepped the law themselves). The Impeachment, without naming a criminal act, voted entirely along Party lines. Yet to watch MSM, Trump is still guilty of something, they just can’t put their finger on it. They have established, on their own, that Trump is a Putin puppet, a racist, a misogynist, a sexist, a homophobe, a xenophobe, and a despicable person, not suitable for the office. All without facts to back up such assertions. But the MSM REALLY went overboard with the last few years of reporting about ‘systematic racism’ and police brutality, especially against Black suspects!
Consider:
1. Trevon Martin. The media portrayed Martin as an innocent bystander, hunted down by George Zimmerman for the sole reason of being Black. News media continued to portray Martin as an angelic, choirboy, innocent young man, showing pictures of him as a young teenager. Until the truth came out in court. Martin attacked Zimmerman, slamming his head into pavement, until Zimmerman shot Martin in self-defense. Later, more current, photos of Martin surfaced, with him looking like a menacing, gang-bang type figure. Why were those pictures omitted from news coverage? Because they would lay waste to the image of Martin the media was presenting. The MSM was 100% wrong, with no apologies for being wrong. This trend will be continued.
2. Michael Brown. The MSM said Michael Brown as a ‘lovable giant, getting ready to enroll in college’, who was shot down by White policeman Darren Wilson, as he had his hands up, saying, “Don’t shoot!” In fact, this narrative was pushed nationwide nearly instantly after Brown was shot. Within minutes, every news viewer across the country was angry at officer Wilson for executing such an innocent, lovable, Black man! The only problem: not one element of that news story was factual. Not one. Brown had just strong-armed a convenience store owner, stealing some cigars, which is actually why officer Wilson stopped him in the first place. Then Brown tried to enter Wilson’s vehicle, and tried to take Wilson’s firearm from him! And after Brown got some distance away from Wilson, Brown physically charged Wilson. Autopsy results confirm every detail of officer Wilson’s story. An investigation by Attorney General Eric Holder (not a Conservative) cleared officer Wilson of ANY racial or hate crimes. But the MSM did their job: “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” became a slogan worldwide to depict police brutality that simply didn’t happen. No apology for being 100% wrong again.
3. George Floyd. A portion of an iPhone video capturing George Floyd, a Black man, on the street, with White police officer Derek Chauvin’s knee in his neck for EIGHT MINUTES! Floyd was pleading, “I can’t breathe!” Instantly, the MSM showed that video clip virtually nonstop for hours. Floyd’s crime was the attempt to pass a counterfeit $20 bill. So, the story went, Chauvin killed Floyd for passing that fake money! Riots ensued nationwide—it is OPEN SEASON on Black men, with White cops killing them wantonly! Minor issue: that isn’t what happened. Floyd had so much Fentanyl in his system, he likely would’ve died on his own. Then, weeks later, the Minneapolis police decided to release the dash cam of the incident. Floyd was aggressive with the investigating officers, and was saying “I can’t breathe” while alone in the back seat of the patrol car, long before Chauvin’s actions. Floyd acted intoxicated the entire dash cam film. The autopsy declared the cause of death to be heart issues, not strangulation. While no one seems to question how long it took to release the dash cam video, the results of the initial iPhone video were quite apparent: riots, buildings burning, looting, and general mayhem occurred nationwide, all in George Floyd’s name. Floyd received THREE televised funeral services, completely ignoring his long criminal past. Again, no apologies from MSM for deceiving the country.
4. Jacob Blake. Another Black man, Jacob Blake, was innocently minding his own business in Kenosha, WI, when he was shot in the back several times by local policemen, paralyzing him from the waist down. The body-cam footage of the shooting was another nationwide publish, showing how it is just unsafe for innocent Black men in the US—they could be shot, for no reason! Then the real story comes out. Blake was threatening his girlfriend, the reason the police were called in the first place. Blake had already been accused of assaulting said girlfriend in the past, and he had a history of violence against the police. When Blake completely ignored police demands to stop and place his hands where they could see them, and then (depending upon the view) he either already had a knife or was reaching inside the car window for that knife, THAT is when the police shot him. More riots ensued in Kenosha. Did MSM correct their original, racially inflammatory narrative? Hardly.
5. Breonna Taylor. March 13th, Louisville police went to the apartment of Breonna Taylor. Kenneth Walker, Taylor’s boyfriend, was wanted for illegal drug offenses. Per the MSM, police executed a no-knock warrant, barged into the apartment, and shot at Walker, missing him, but killing Taylor in her sleep. For months, MSM stuck to that story, causing yet more racial unrest nationwide. Pro athletes put Breonna Taylor’s name on their helmets and jerseys. The national outcry was justifiably intense. Except when the facts came out in the grand jury proceeding in September (SIX MONTHS later), NONE of the data the MSM reported was accurate. Taylor and Walker were BOTH on the warrant, as BOTH were suspected of drug dealing. Neighbors testified that they heard the police knock and announce themselves. Evidence was submitted that Walker shot FIRST, and the police fired in reply. Taylor was behind Walker, not asleep in bed. The grand jury cited one of the now-fired police for endangerment, as he fired at the apartment building from his car after the melee started. But the grand jury found that the Louisville police (with the noted exception) acted appropriately, and no-billed the officers. The Kentucky DA, a Black man named Daniel Cameron, held a press conference, detailing the facts as presented to the grand jury. But the genie was out of that bottle, as the protests and riots continued. Not only did Cameron’s conference not diffuse the issue, MSM folks doubted the truthfulness of his statements, without any evidence of lying. Again, despite data to the contrary, MSM has not apologized or retracted any of their erroneous reports.
Five for Five. Five times, racial unrest stories were told in complete error, later facts disproved them all, and no backing off of the original narratives. From this distance, one could make a decisive argument that the MSM is INTENTIONALLY stoking racial unrest, and the riots and mayhem that that entails. I am still waiting for MSM to get such a story correct. If institutional racism is as prevalent as the MSM tells us (constantly), they should only have to look out a window to find truthful evidence of it! They wouldn’t need to create or propagate false narratives for months on end. Do they no longer have investigators verifying the facts of their stories before airing or printing them? Or does the truth not matter at all to them? Is the new goal the unrest, in and of itself? Now you see why I am trending toward believing that MSM is an ‘enemy of the State’ and ‘instigator of unrest’. Maybe our hyper-political climate is pushing folks to extremes, but as of right now: I simply no longer believe them Not. At. All. Geez, I hope I’m wrong, and overreacting. We shall see.
