|
March 10, 2005
Mainstream Media Content Warning: Headlines Harmful If Swallowed Whole
By Bryanna Bevens
Personally, I’m a
Google News girl. The only time I read print media
is in line at the grocery store. And then it is usually
an Enquirer story about a 5 year old Nepalese boy
who is being slowly devoured by a face-eating tumor.
Side note: Interesting—I was channel surfed into
one of those cable medical shows where doctors in
Thailand were surgically removing from the face of a young
boy meteor-sized tumors known literally as
face-eating tumors.
Hmmm. I am now reconsidering my position on Big Foot and
women impregnated by aliens.
So I read the daily news for the most part online, a
range of mainstream to just right of conspiracy theory.
For example, every morning, I glance at the
Washington Post
and the
Los Angeles Times websites.
The Post is to check in with
George Will who, in addition to being the very best
conservative writer, owns the top slot on my all time
favorite men list. [FML].
[VDARE.COM note:
please remonstrate directly with
Bryanna, not us!]
The
LA Times?...that’s
more in the spirit of the Godfather. You know, keep your
friends close, keep your enemies closer.
Then I mosey over to Michelle Malkin’s
blog,
2blowhards,
Drudge and the
National Interest.
A
visit to Malkin’s blog is like 50 ccs of
political junkie heroin with an IV-push STAT.
The National Interest is basically the old
National Review only super-sized with a Coke,
and it’s home to
John O’Sullivan who is currently in contention for a
slot on the FML.
It occurs to me that skimming the headlines to stay
abreast of current events may explain so many
poorly-cast votes by Americans—and the ignorance
with which people debate immigration.
If you were to arrive at an opinion based solely on
daily headlines, you could easily arrive at a position
180 degrees due south of reality.
You might even think a “Virginian”—perhaps
a disgruntled descendant of Robert E. Lee?–was recently
accused of
conspiring to kill the President.
Here are some other recent headlines and sub-heads pertaining to immigration and the National Question.
Gazzar is referring to
Congressman David Dreier, chairman of the
committee on rules. The headline suggests that
Dreier is a leader in immigration reform, doing
something to mend the problem.
Those of us in the
reform movement know otherwise. Sure, Dreier is on the
front lines...in the way that
Cornwallis was in Yorktown. In other words, an
alright guy but not exactly on our side.
Here is another:
Believe it or
not, this is an article about a recent survey that
showed two-thirds of Florida voters opposed to Bush’s
proposed guest worker program. Immigration reform
advocates are generally opposed to the program because
they see the amnesty wolf in sheep’s clothing.
However, the headline leads the reader to believe the
exact opposite. By opposing the guest worker
program, two-thirds of Florida voters are in essence
supporting immigration reform.
When in reference to a group or individual working
against illegal immigration, the headlines are often
mean-spirited and spiteful.
This is an article about District Attorney John M.
Morganelli who ordered the raid of a local business
wherein 27 “undocumented” immigrants were
arrested for using fake
social security cards to gain employment.
The journalist tells the story of one of the illegal
aliens arrested in the raid. He had been living here
peacefully for 18 years when suddenly the big bad DA
decided to pick on him...blah, blah, blah.
Histrionics run amok. The DA is said to be on a
crusade against these poor people.
In truth, he is doing his job and well, I might add.
 |
Supremacists a border worry: FBI, civilian group are
concerned about racists joining border sweeps next
month, by
Susan Carroll [3/05/05 The Arizona Republic] |
The Minute Man Project
is a group of roughly 1000 volunteers who are dedicating
30 days to assist the
Border Patrol in their efforts to apprehend
illegal aliens from Mexico as they cross the border
into the US.
But the headline suggests that the organizers are
white supremacists—and the sub-head implies that
this is the
opinion of the FBI.
Judge for yourself, this was the article’s only
reference to the FBI:
“FBI spokeswoman
Susan Herskovitz said the civilian patrol's plan to
converge on this town of 1,500 on April 1 for a month
long stakeout on the border is ‘definitely a concern.’
She declined to elaborate.”
For reporter Carroll to discern an insinuation of ethnic
supremacy in such a mundane bureaucratic comment
requires genius-level
creative aptitude. Once again, the reader is left
with an impression quite contrary to truth.
Needless to say, so long as we have mainstream media
guiding the
waters of public opinion, readers will have to
prepare themselves in three ways.
 | First,
skip the headline and read the whole article. |
 | Next,
after reading the article (especially
mine) consider the source and think for yourself. |
Bryanna Bevens [email
her] is a political consultant and former chief of staff
for a member of the California State Assembly. |