Question: If news isn’t reported, is it still news? Not according to the old media. The old axiom, ‘If it bleeds, it leads’, is still operative in most newsrooms around the country. Good news, if reported at all, is merely an afterthought.
For the savvy news consumer, good news is recognized mainly through its absence. Just last week, headlines across the country reported the dire predictions of the World Health Organization - the swine flu, oops, the H1N1 virus, was ‘a grave threat to humanity’. A major pandemic is imminent and we’re (again) on the brink of catastrophe.
The threat was so dire, it required the president of the greatest country in the world (that’s America, for you Obama voters) to appear, once again, on national TV to advise all citizens to wash their hands. Lost in the lockstep reporting of the old media, was the fact that, gee, many ‘experts’ were claiming that this dangerous flu strain was no more severe than the normal flu strain.
The pandemic failed to materialize, prompting headlines warning of ‘complacency.’ It appears the WHO, the Obama administration and the liberal media were, well, wrong. Swine flu deaths: App 12. Unreported, was the fact that regular flu deaths (in 2006) were 56,000.
The reigning political elite that now rule our country have officially branded most conservative views as ‘fringe’ views held by ‘extremists’, validating a viewpoint held for decades by the old media. Thus journalists no longer feel the need to report on issues of concern to the 62 million Americans who didn’t vote for Obama. Their concerns are officially irrelevant. Case closed.
The majority of Americans realize the liberal bent of the old media. Most can identify opinion pieces that are increasingly presented as news, but they have to resort to the net or talk radio in order to be made aware of all the good news which is deliberately relegated to the back burner in the (remaining) newspapers and nightly news broadcasts.
Recent polls show shrinking support for new gun control measures and strong public sentiment for enforcing existing laws instead.
A new national poll suggests that a majority of Americans oppose legalizing same sex marriages.
Seventy-seven percent (77%) of U.S. voters say that they prefer a free market economy over a government-managed economy. That’s up seven points since December.
A new poll conducted by Pew Research finds the support for legal abortions has dropped to its lowest level in 15 years.
For just the second time in more than five years of daily or weekly tracking, Republicans now lead Democrats in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.
These items are no longer considered news by the media elite. Not only does the old media purposefully downplay any news item that challenges their lock-step liberal world view, news organizations have taken increasing latitude with the news they do choose to report.
A recent NYT headline announced that ‘Criminal Prosecutions Will Not Be Pursued For Bush ‘Terror Lawyers’. Whew. Reading beyond the headline however, one found the real story. Namely, the unprecedented interference and intimidation by our Justice Dept., deciding merely to refer those nasty lawyers to the Bar Assoc. for disbarment.
Reading this story, casual readers might assume that the government actually has the right to censure legal opinions. Serious readers know that our very rule of law in under serious attack. Ho Hum.
The media has now put a new twist on Dan Rather’s ‘fake but accurate’ premise. They routinely report ‘accurate but fake’ stories, with facts presented in a such a way as to alter their original meaning. This is deliberate. This is accepted. And this is media malfeasance.
If the conservative press decided to adopt the old media’s misleading and manipulative template, one could expect to see headlines like ‘Nancy Morgan Decides Not To Indict Obama For Phony Birth Certificate’. But I wouldn’t post a headline like that, because its not honest journalism. And neither the old media.
By the way, in case you haven’t heard, we won the war in Iraq.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement