Image 01 Image 03

Media Bias Tag

What a difference eight years makes. With few exceptions, our national media is confused and depressed about the prospect of President Donald Trump. Back in 2008 however, the media was downright giddy over the election of Obama. Some journalists even wanted George W. Bush to step aside early so Obama could be sworn in before January 20th. The Media Research Center recorded all of this for posterity:
December 15, 2008 - Must Swear In Obama Right Now “We can’t afford to waste an hour, much less a day or a week or a month. And this business of being a lame duck President and saying, you know, ‘Adios. I’m going to the ranch. I’m just not going to do very much during this period.’ We can’t afford it....We’re in possibly, possibly the biggest crisis we’ve been in since December 7, 1941, and maybe since the time of the Civil War. So, we can’t afford to have this interregnum.” — Ex-CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, December 5.

The Second Coming by William Butler Yeats starts with words (highlighted) I think of very often:
Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
I recently highlighted those words, "the center cannot hold," to a friend when describing some of the insane rantings I've seen on Facebook against Trump and about the election result. Liberals have lost it.

As if faith in establishment media wasn't depleted enough, there seems no end to stories recently exposed as hoaxes. In fact, just about every story where someone was supposedly the victim of pro-Trump hate has turned out to be nothing more than wish casting. We're keeping track of this particular strain of media malpractice. Not surprisingly, most of the hoaxes took place on college campuses. This is what we have so far:

1. Muslim student’s claim that Trump supporters attacked her was HOAX

A Muslim woman who attends Baruch College recently claimed that three drunken men attacked her on the subway and pulled at her headscarf while yelling “Trump.”

I'm sick of writing this kind of "well, actually" post. They're required far too often, but this is the world in which we live. Media narrative wish casts one version of a story while the facts say another. Such is the case (again) in the arson and vandalization of a black church in Mississippi. An arrest has been made, reports the AP:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doesn't hesitate to take to social media to get his point across, including when the press treats him unfairly. (Where have I heard that before?) But if you read the headlines about some comments he made at a press event, you'd think Netanyahu just admitted to "attacking", "lashing out" at, and "berating, badmouthing" journalists on social media. But that's not what he said. Those journalists misstated the question he was asked in their headlines. Leftist Haaretz used the "lashing out" words:

While the Washington Post didn't seem very concerned about the eight years of disinformation oozing from the Obama White House and its online surrogates, they are so obsessed with President-elect Trump that they've created a Google Chrome browser extension to fact check Trump's tweets. WaPo writes:
We made a tool that slips a bit more context into Trump's tweets. It's still in the early stages, but our goal is to provide additional context where needed for Trump's tweets moving forward (and a few golden oldies).

There's been plenty of talk about "fake news" since the election. In fact, some people in politics and media have even suggested that fake news contributed to Hillary Clinton's stunning loss. But what about the supposedly legitimate media. Aren't they to blame as well? In his newest Firewall video, Bill Whittle puts it all in perspective. Here's a partial transcript via Truth Revolt:
Bill Whittle's Firewall: Fake News If there is one thing you can ABSOLUTELY count on in modern American politics, it is this: every time a Progressive Democrat invokes the Founding Fathers and American Freedom, that will be immediately followed by a proposal that reduces American Freedom and is an insult to the Founding Fathers.

Relying on an "expert" who turns out to be a former Obama aide, CNN this morning compared the Trump family to "corrupt regimes around the world." Asked by host Christi Paul whether the presence of Trump family members in official meetings with foreign heads of state and business leaders posed an ethical problem, CNN reporter Cristina Alesci said "a number of ethics experts said, yeah, it's a serious problem. A number of outspoken experts are comparing the Trump's family behavior to corrupt regimes around the world." The only "expert" cited was former Obama aide Norman Eisen, seen in a clip saying "this is not the first time this has happened. I'm just shocked it's happened in the United States."

You may recall one form of the left's post-election hysteria was "what do we tell the children?" That died down as recounts and Russian conspiracies took over but Ali Wentworth, the wife of ABC News reporter (and former Clinton staffer) George Stephanopoulos, appeared on The View this week and explained the horror the election has caused for her children. The Washington Free Beacon reported:
George Stephanopoulos’ Wife Tells ‘The View’ Their Daughters Are Scared After Election While discussing the 2016 presidential election with the hosts of ABC’s show “The View,” Wentworth described how her daughters were handling Hillary Clinton’s loss.

Because I write so much about climate change, I am constantly barraged by fake news about the hoax-based science. The good news: The mainstream media has finally noticed the fake news problem. The bad news: The main stream media hasn't recognized it's a significant source of the problem. The ugly news: There are policies proposals being bandied about that are suppose to prevent the spread of "fake news" (i.e. news found on conservative and other sites that the progressive left want silenced).

Politico's national editor Michael Hirsh has resigned after he pushed for attacks on white supremacist leader Richard Spencer and published Spencer's address. Spencer's group National Policy Institute recently held a gathering in DC with people posting pictures of themselves doing the Nazi salute. Spencer and his small minded group hold despicable viewpoints, but let's use our brain here. No one, especially a member of the media, should ever publish a person's private address. We should never advocate for violence against anyone no matter how disgusting we find them.

By now you probably have read the stories about how Trump called a meeting with the press, only to give them a dressing down. If you don't care all that much---well, the press certainly does. Just as an example, read this from David Remnick of the New Yorker:
The fantasy of the normalization of Donald Trump—the idea that a demagogic candidate would somehow be transformed into a statesman of poise and deliberation after his Election Day victory—should now be a distant memory, an illusion shattered. First came the obsessive Twitter rants directed at “Hamilton” and “Saturday Night Live.” Then came Monday’s astonishing aria of invective and resentment aimed at the media, delivered in a conference room on the twenty-fifth floor of Trump Tower...

Is it the role of the media to serve as "opposition" to the Trump administration? Yes, in the mind of Chris Cuomo. On his CNN show this morning, Cuomo said "the media cannot yield. This administration is going to demand constant fact-checking, and opposition. Because otherwise, you don't know which way it's going to go from day to day. That's just a fact." Fact-checking an administration? Absolutely. That's an important role for the press. But "opposition?" That's the role for the opposition party. Unless, of course, Cuomo sees the MSM as a wing of the DNC? Don't answer that question, Chris. Compare and contrast with what Chris Matthews said in 2008 at the dawn of the Obama administration: "I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work . . . It is my job. To make this work successfully."

On With All Due Respect, John Heilemann was aggressively questioning Kellayanne Conway, arguing that conflicts of interests would arise when the Trump administration makes decisions that could affect Trump business interests at home or abroad. Conway eventually had enough. She shot back: "look, John, I know the election results are very tough to swallow, particularly for those of you who just couldn't see it coming, couldn't even conceive of the possibility that the other candidate may actually win, that you don't understand America." Ouch.

The New York Times public editor Liz Spayd's op-ed contains a lot of harsh truths and realities for those who write for one of the world's most famous newspapers: drop the bias. Her office has received "five times the normal level" of complaints "and the pace has only just recently tapered off." Spayd does not flat out say that, but she portrays it in her eloquent article:
But I hope any chest thumping about the impressive subscriber bump won’t obscure a hard-eyed look at coverage. Because from my conversations with readers, and from the emails that have come into my office, I can tell you there is a searing level of dissatisfaction out there with many aspects of the coverage.

Disgust at the open bias, collusion and smugness of the media -- from the older line major networks to the 20/30-something former SJWs with keyboards -- was part of the background for the backlash leading to the Trump victory. As that same media rolls effortlessly into attacking President-Elect Trump's transition and appointments, consider this analysis by Will Rahn of CBS News. It's possibly the best I've seen. Here's and excerpt and video, but please read the whole thing.