|
MSM now. . .that outrageous non-story has had so much airplay that "news" anchors might as well have been reading word-for-word press releases from the RNC as fact.
It is bad enough that the entire "news" cycle is constantly dominated by whatever ridiculous, over-the-top statement falls out of some right-wing loon's mouth. But that has become so normalized now that the media looks for ways to create new "controversy" from every wingnut fringe element that can issue an email press release. The other sides? You will rarely hear a peep - just like we so often only see weak "spokespersons" allegedly "representing" another point of view on the air just so the public can see them shut down (or shouted down)in a pretend "debate."
There isn't a newscaster in America with the balls to actually question how a con-artist con-servative self-proclaimed "Christian" can lie with impunity, even with the evidence in front of their faces. Hell, they won't even call them "self-proclaimed" or "self-identified Christians" - nope, they are simply "Christians," despite an affinity for breaking a major commandment every time they open their pieholes.
Michelangelo Signorile brought up a very interesting point recently about just how far the MSM has gone over to the dark side. When a gay group, for example, "outs" a "conservative" public official, using attributed quotes from people who have had experiences or know of experiences with the guy, the MSM refuses to speculate on the officials sexual orientation (think Lindsay Graham, for example, or Crist). At best, they'll say "rumored" if anything at all. Yet, when Judge Walker issued the Federal District Court decision regarding Proposition H8 a couple of weeks ago, every major media outlet proclaimed him as "gay" and it was spread around (mostly fed by repeated right-wing talking points) like wildfire as "fact." The only evidence? A San Francisco Chronicle article which once said his sexual orientation was an "open secret" - using no evidence and no attributed references. The media's defense when this double standard was brought to their attention? "Well, he didn't DENY it."
It's the same way they seem to handle the Dr. Laura "controversy." It's rare to see an MSM outlet actually EXPLAIN the First Amendment to the American public, even though much of our population is so ignorant about how our government works that they'd vote their own rights away if the media told them to. . .Instead, we heard the same, tired, con-artist con-servative defense of "her First Amendment rights being violated" as if she is somehow entitled to have a radio show to run her mouth. I've come to the conclusion that conservatives believe there are two First Amendments. One for them, which entitles them to unlimited use of the public airwaves to say whatever they want about their fellow citizens because they "own" them and free speech is only allowed if you OWN the means of broadcast or are being PAID to talk; and the other First Amendment is for the "little" people, who are entitled to have an opinion but have no business engaging in public criticism of any conservative talking point or having access to media to engage in that criticism.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
