If the Mainstream Media Were Actually the Enemy of the People, What Would They Be Doing Differently?

Article by Bonchie in "RedState":

It’s a question worth pondering, and one that entered my mind after seeing two recent examples of “journalism” that we’ll get to shortly.

The preponderance of the legacy media, and many in right-wing media as well, insist on the importance of outlets like The New York Times, CNN, and NPR. We are constantly told that they play a vital role in our society, one whose absence would cause our entire system to collapse into tyranny. But is that assumption reality? I’m growing more and more skeptical every day.

I’ve previously been one to shy away from President Trump’s “enemy of the people” language, but perhaps I’ve been too kind? Every single day, multiple new examples of the media slandering their political enemies and lying about issues are brought to the forefront. It’s gotten to the point where you can’t go more than a few hours without yet another “journalist” spreading something that’s clearly false or disingenuously attacking someone they deem politically inferior.

Take this tweet from CNN’s April Ryan.

AprilDRyan ✔ @AprilDRyan

Should #StayAtHome protestors who endanger other Americans by not following @CDCgov guidelines about physical distancing be required to sign a waiver refusing medical attention at a hospital and not take up a ventilator if they contract coronavirus? #COVID19 #StayHome

This is quite literally a self-proclaimed journalist promoting the idea that people who exercise their constitutional rights against government overreach should be left to die if they get sick. Think about the implications of that and how such an argument would be treated if it came from someone other than a far left-wing mouthpiece.

Ironically, her logic is the same flawed logic that some use when they claim black people who protest police violence shouldn’t be protected by police. That’s not how any of this works and to suggest such is incredibly gross. This country is founded on the idea that you can protest without forfeiting your rights in the process. But someone on CNN’s payroll is calling for people to be left to die and not a single other journalist even bothered to call her on it.

But stupid Twitter rhetoric aside, there are also much more serious implications to how the media promote their narratives and choose sides. For example, take Facebook’s recent collusion with state governments to censor protest announcements. This is how CNN reported it.

Oliver Darcy ✔ @oliverdarcy

 · Apr 20, 2020

Anti-quarantine protests being organized through Facebook in California, New Jersey, and Nebraska, are being removed from the platform on the instruction of governments in those three states because it violates stay-at-home orders, Facebook spokesperson @andymstone tells @donie.

Oliver Darcy ✔ @oliverdarcy

Full story from @donie: "Unless government prohibits the event during this time, we allow it to be organized on Facebook," @andymstone said. "For this same reason, events that defy government's guidance on social distancing aren't allowed on Facebook.

 

 If you actually go read the article, there’s not one mention of the constitutionality of what Facebook is doing. There is no counter to their claims about social distancing orders, nor any care taken to respect the rights of others. Instead, CNN parrots what Facebook is doing with the implication of total approval.

Ask yourself what the difference is between the CCP colluding with social media to suppress the Hong Kong protestors and what Facebook is attempting to do now in the United States? The answer is nothing, yet our media can’t be bothered to even question such happenings. If they can’t stand up for freedom of speech, what exactly is their value?

Justin Hart @justin_hart

Remember. If the govt ever went full-Beijing on the stay-at-home orders - your national press would be the first folks in line to weld you inside your house.

 

Is that tweet wrong? Because the evidence I’m seeing says that depending on who’s in power (namely if it’s a Democrat), that’s exactly what would happen. But don’t call them the enemy of the people, right?

At what point does decorum become the responsibility of the party that continues to act without any? At what point do oft-repeated assumptions of value and importance get challenged? We can’t even count on our media to support people protesting clearly unconstitutional government orders to not travel between their own properties. I’d say that’s an institution that’s lost any semblance of value at this point.

In other words, I’m done fretting about Trump’s language regarding the press. I’m done caring that he “attacks” reporters when they ask him ridiculously biased questions. They’ve earned the scorn they receive, including their incredibly low approval ratings among the public. It’s up to them to earn that trust back, not for me and or anyone else to hand it to them by default. If they don’t want to be called the enemy of the people, they should cease acting as if they are.

https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2020/04/21/if-the-mainstream-media-were-actually-the-enemy-of-the-people-what-would-they-be-doing-differently/