Media
The 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, among other rights, grants freedom of the press. It specifically states: "... Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press ..." As with the rest of the Constitution, a brilliant political principle without question. With its brilliance though, it does not regulate the quality of the free press and throughout our history we have seen both outstanding journalism and pitiful examples of a free press. In the second decade of the 21st century, there are two strong political ideologies (left & right) controlling the political dialogue in this country. During the 2012 Presidential Election, spin from the left and right are presented as mainstream information and what was formerly mainstream, balanced & unbiased information sources have changed or evolved their format to the point that unbiased reporting is unavailable. In the 2016 Presidential Election, there was no effort at all to cover up the biased reporting of the mainstream media. Today's news sources are targeting specific messages to gain specific ideological audiences, thereby presenting bias. This bias is most times unidentifiable, not completely truthfully nor presented with perspective and context that the reader/viewer/listener requires and expects. Shockingly, sometimes this bias is purposely (NBC) camouflaged (NY Times - 4th paragraph down) from the reader/viewer/listener. In our polarized society, these strong messages on both sides overpower the ability of people with limited time to evaluate issues to find a center, compromise, reasonable or mainstream position. Especially when each side is also saying they offer the center, compromise, reasonable and mainstream position, whether they do or not. There are media watchdog organizations out there, but they also represent an ideological left and right. Much of this website is dedicated to shedding light on the bias in current American journalism. While we long for that great post-WWII journalistic era, where we were served by responsible, professional and largely unbiased journalism, unfortunately, we are no longer so served. That makes it difficult for American citizens to find the truth among the hype, agenda peddling and biased reporting. If you look at the bottom of this page and all pages on this website, you will find major (and some not so major) news organizations listed based on their political leanings, Left or Right. You will immediately notice there are none listed in the center. While there may be the occasional article in any of these news sources which could be a center, balanced and truthful report, by and large the reporting from that news source is defined by its L-R political leanings. The Gray Area is attempting to help its readers by so identifying the biases of the news source from which a report originates to help you identify the spin within the news piece you are reading or watching. We will include an article in the center if we believe it represents the center, a thoughtful, balanced and honest perspective. That way, presented with facts and recognizing the source, you can make up your own mind. In this 'media' section, we comment on the egregiousness of some reporting so that you may see the best and worst of what we must today use as our sources of information. From an analysis of all the sources, THE GRAY AREA HAS CREATED ITS OWN SPECTRUM OF MEDIA BIAS.
Archive Related Items

A powerful photograph that could 'save' America forever

7/15/24
from The Gray Area:
7/15/24:
The Washington Post had this headline in an article yesterday regarding the above photo, A powerful photograph that could change America forever. We have one word different in our headline, change to save. Why? Change & save are both political narratives. To accept one is to disavow the other. 'Change' is a left-wing narrative that says many things. It says we, America. need change. America is systemically racist, unjust, discriminatory, illegitimate in its founding, fundamental change and redistribution. Thus, Trump would inhibit this 'change' from that horrible to a better American existence. The other narrative, save, illustrates America as a shining light on the hill, freedom and justice for all which is in danger by the progressive, woke cult of Marxism and needs to be 'saved' from ruin. Which narrative best describes this photo? Change? Save? Maybe neither? As the Media Research Center noted: ... bloodied and surrounded by Secret Service agents, Trump defiantly pumped his fist at the crowd and shouted, "Fight!" This moment now seared into history through iconic photos. The Left neither embodies nor recognizes the qualities of strength and courage, and the media refuse to depict Donald Trump as either. This was evident as CNN and MSNBC, which have chastised Trump as a "threat to Democracy"— perhaps acknowledging their culpability — initially reported that "loud noises" were heard and Trump "falls", at the event.  Far-left wing VOX, surprising everyone, published this: It's his brand now. “A lot of people say it’s the most iconic photo they’ve ever seen,” “Trump has an iconic image,” agrees Erik Bucy, “One for the ages, that is instantly recognizable. "These only come around once in a while.” It communicates resiliency in the face of crisis, and a certain kind of instinctual strength, but also an instinct about performance and maximizing the moment from a media point of view. He’s bloodied. He’s got to be in an initial phase of shock. And yet he still realizes, “Wait, there’s a media opportunity here, and that above all else has to be kind of leveraged before I even get off the stage. Who cares if there’s other shooters?” Which there might have been. It’s pretty remarkable from that point of view. I doubt many politicians or public figures would have had that presence of mind. Just that boldness to make the most of it visually. That shows you how he’s oriented and why he’s remained in front of our screen for the past nine years. Are people thinking about his instinctual media savvy, or are they thinking about the idea of resilience in the face of violence? No, they’re seeing that American symbolism. They’re seeing the blue sky. They’re seeing him defiant despite having just been injured, being surrounded by dedicated guards and Secret Service members. And I think that the fundamental takeaway is: This is a powerful person who’s got a lot of determination and — and you wouldn’t think this of Donald Trump, but — a lot of courage in the face of real threat. If you believe that America faces a real threat to its future, Trump, in this potential tragedy and in this image, has shown the strength needed to 'fight' for America.  Not to 'fight' for change, but for America, to 'save' it for posterity. More From The Washington Post: More From VOX:


365 Days Page
Archive Related Items
Comment ( 0 )