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.

'Free people' are needed to monitor a 'free press'

7/15/24
from The Gray Area:
7/15/24:
A question to the media. Did President Trump incite a riot ('violent insurrection' in your words) at the Capitol on Jan 6, 2021? Your answer is certainly yes. But, according to Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), 'blaming the media for the Trump assassination attempt is cynical, invective, inappropriate and incoherent'. One, a politically motivated 'assessment' by the left-wing media is appropriate to blame Trump. The other, politically motivated 'invective' by the left-wing media, is 'inappropriate' to blame the media. In the same article, CJR gives examples of media extreme rhetoric and political narratives like; "is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs”, and, “would-be dictator”, which they subsequently excuse. They call these media actions 'less exceptional" than right-wing reactions might indicate. Because, they say, there are many other examples throughout our history of blaming the media. Thus trying to establish blaming the media as a knee jerk reaction. Certainly some truth tho that,  But, reason would also tell anyone with their feet squarely planted in reality that the media has an historical trend line for consistently inciting the public - - - on purpose. Other media narratives inciting the public seen and heard ad nauseam include:
  • MAGA insurrectionists
  • Biden: MAGA more dangerous that terrorism
  • a threat to democracy
  • authoritarian
  • Hitler
  • Trump is more extreme than Hitler
  • by any means necessary
  • for Trump to be “eliminated"
MRC President Brent Bozell posted on X,The leftist media have been pushing the narrative that Donald Trump is a threat to democracy and comparing him to Hitler. We shouldn’t be surprised that someone acted on that.” MRC has created a link, “ Trump Assassination Attempt" for all related stories. Click here for a compilation video by MRC’s Bill D’Agostino illustrating the media's depiction of Trump as a fascist and threat to democracy. These are similar kinds of invective the media convict Trump of using on Jan 6th.  When they shout them with incumbent media arrogance, they say it is truth & they expect media immunity. Is CJR saying that there is no place for media responsibility? Or, is media responsibility only necessary for right-wing media, not left-wing media? MSNBC took one of the worst media examples of this invective, Morning Joe, off the air this morning. Responsible, but way too late. However, ABCNews leaves  another, The View, on air today. The View predictably calls for 'gun control'. Nothing escapes the opportunity to push political narratives and to misdirect from news they don't like. The left-wing media further blame Trump for inciting violence which turned out to be against himself. 'Bloodbath', 'bedlam', etc, which are words they redefine as specifically violent, when they know those words are obviously used as a metaphor for the chaos, lack of leadership and destruction of American stability that Biden's policies have and will continue to cause. Should politicians and the left-wing media curb any level of words and phrases that can be misused by media or misconstrued by the public? Absolutely! No one is suggesting that we do not want or need a free press. We do want & need a 'free' press, no matter how horrible they act.  CJR does accurately state that "plenty of those right-wing critics were only too quick to tweet out the iconic images that the photographers at the rally—very much members of “the media”—risked their lives to capture. However, “even in a horrifying moment such as this, they (the media) just can’t help themselves,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) reacted.
  • “Trump rushed off stage after loud noises at rally,” read the front page of The Washington Post.
  • CNN’s version of the story was even worse, with “Secret Service rushes Trump off stage after he falls at rally.”
The media bias and political motivations are transparent. The control of bad, 'free' press should be in the hands of a 'free' people, to judge the quality of their 'free' press. A 'free' press should not be ascribed 'elite', expert status that they easily misuse. A 'free' press should not be subsidized by the government (NPR). And, based on their track record, media fact checkers should not be believed. We, a 'free' people, can and should chose not to watch, read or listen to the biased, sensationalized and often fictitiously reporting networks. Just like other bad businesses, at a maximum, they should go out of business for their poor performance.  At a minimum, lack of pubic support should marginalize them (The National Enquirer). More From CJR:


365 Days Page
Comment ( 0 )