In a time of rapid social upheaval, too many Americans find themselves marginalized by the media.
What they believed yesterday is no longer acceptable today. The world that they knew is crumbling. And for many of these folks, the mainstream media are on the other side.
And this is a problem, one that strikes at the core of the news business and its claim to fairness.
If you are an American who is opposed to gay marriage or respects the Confederate flag, you barely see yourself reflected in the coverage. The message is that you are clueless, out of touch, a lost cause. And in some quarters it’s worse: that you are a bigot, a homophobe and a racist.
This even applies to the laudatory coverage of Bruce Jenner becoming Caitlyn Jenner, or Pope Francis’ call to arms against climate change. The world is spinning out of control, as some see it, and the media are redefining the rules.
Read more at FoxNews.com…
[June 30, 2015 · Tom Garrett]
Last Friday’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges represents the culmination of a perfectly executed public-relations campaign.
It is impossible not to be impressed by what this activist-driven effort accomplished—I mean in real terms, not the unserious victory slogans of the campaign itself.
In no particular order, it:
1. Successfully and fundamentally transformed the definition of “marriage,” and did so in a way that portrayed efforts to preserve traditional marriage as the novelty, rather than as the millennia-old status quo.
2. Successfully convinced a critical mass of the public that there is only one side in this debate, despite the fact that the side claiming the monopoly had only existed in any meaningful form for perhaps 20 years.
3. Successfully convinced a critical mass of the public that race and sexual orientation are directly analogous.
4. Successfully convinced a critical mass of the public (and jurists) that there is no possible argument against gay marriage—to the point where federal judges found that not permitting same-sex marriage is definitionally irrational, and had prominent left-leaning outlets calling the dissents simply “crazy.”
5. Successfully branded opponents as simple “bigots” for daring to hold a different view on a live political issue, going so far as to take punitive action against those who did not adopt the “correct” viewpoint.
6. Successfully portrayed the battle as, literally, love versus hate.
7. Successfully accomplished all of the above in about a decade.
The magnitude of it is staggering.
Agree or disagree with the result, the sheer, total dominance with which their opposition was dealt defeat after defeat, constantly being depicted as evil and intellectually bankrupt—even when most of the public was still in favor of traditional marriage—is incredible.
How did this happen?
Briefly: Narcissism by those terrified of being on the dreaded “wrong side of history,” a relentless emphasis on effective emotional appeals and feelings as a basis for law, and a tireless media that was the movement’s greatest ally framing the debate in terms favorable to the non-traditional side.
It’s that last feature that is particularly fascinating.
The great failure of the modern media is its inability to distinguish for its audience between ideological arguments and judicial arguments. Many rank-and-file journos don’t have the requisite skill or education to explain those distinctions. Those who possess that ability are not particularly inclined to use it, because to do so would undermine the possibility that their preferred outcome would become reality (as it did today).
To most SSM advocates, the “how” didn’t matter. They focus only on ends, not means.
Read more at TheAxisOfEgo.com…
Longtime political journalist and pundit Mark Halperin says he owes his Republican sources “an apology” after apparently doubting their claims that MIT economist Jonathan Gruber played a major role in crafting ObamaCare.
Halperin, Bloomberg Politics managing editor, addressed the controversy on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Monday, after a Wall Street Journal report first revealed emails showing Gruber playing a deeper role than previously thought.
“I owe all my Republican sources an apology because they kept telling me he was hugely involved, and the White House played it down,” Halperin said. “They were right. The Republicans were right.”
He said he does not think the White House has been “fully forthcoming” about Gruber’s role.
Read more at FoxNews.com…
Liberal tactics: Repeat what the Conservative just said, but pretend you’re just now saying it and it’s something the Conservative is against, then when the Conservative tries to explain their point, talk over them. Gutiérrez seems oblivious that Ann just said “let’s worry about the people here…” and starts whining that she’s not worried about the people here.
Ann says that the immigration polices prior to 1970 were sane, but became bad after that. Joy Reid claimed Ann insulted her since she(Joy) is the daughter of immigrants. Joy graduated from Harvard in 1991, which would put her age at that time at around 22, meaning she was born prior to 1970. Since she was born here, her parent then immigrated prior to 1970.
But the most priceless bit is when Joy Reid claims that “one of the things we have to do in this country is stop lying…” just as we’re told that she works for MSNBC. Priceless…