In the wake of the Capitol Hill insurrection, FAIR (1/18/21) noted “a new and refreshing ability to apply accurate labels to people and their behaviors…and to apportion blame based on reality, not a wished-for fantasy of balance.”
After January 6, we noted (FAIR.org, 1/18/21) that many in corporate media finally found the courage to cast aside their commitment to false equivalence. Presumably shocked by what they had witnessed, reporters began using words like “sedition” and “incitement” without having to put them in the mouth of a source who could then be balanced by an opposing view. News outlets directly stated that Donald Trump “set in motion” (New York Times, 1/6/21) or was responsible for “inciting” (CNN.com, 1/12/21) the deadly attack on democracy.
Yet we also noted that Trump’s lack of support at the time from within the establishment, Republicans and Democrats alike, made that honesty easier for reporters—some of whom nevertheless couldn’t shake their old habits as a debate began over whether Trump should be impeached yet again for inciting the insurrection.
Six months later, Trump has solidified his grip on the right, and elite journalists have largely returned to their perfunctory both-sides reporting.
‘Political chaos’
Because Republicans refused to participate in the January 6 hearings unless pro-insurrection members could be on the panel, the Washington Post (7/25/21) declared that “a cloud of controversy…threatens to compromise the investigation from the outset.”
On Tuesday, the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol began its inquiry into the right-wing insurrection. But investigations can lead to calls for accountability, so the Trumpist right, which has doubled down on its own innocence and its election fraud lie, is doing everything in its power to thwart it.
Corporate journalists are handling it shockingly poorly. PressRun‘s Eric Boehlert (7/27/21) collected some choice lines:
- “January 6 Select Committee to Open Investigation Amid Political Chaos and Controversy” — Washington Post (7/25/21)
- “Congress’ effort to investigate the January 6th attack on the Capitol has turned into another political battle” — NBC News (Twitter, 7/22/21)
- “It was also the latest evidence of how poisonous relations have become between the two parties, especially in the House” — New York Times (7/21/21)
What “battle” prompted such “political chaos”? House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi rejected two of the five Republican nominees to the committee: Jim Banks and Jim Jordan, both of whom had been vocal supporters of efforts to undermine the election and had condemned the inquiry itself, and whose nominations were clearly intended to subvert the committee’s work. (Banks had declared that the committee was created “solely to malign conservatives and to justify the left’s authoritarian agenda.”) Republican minority leader Kevin McCarthy then announced a GOP boycott of the committee. Rather than report this obvious stunt for what it was, journalists happily played up the right’s fake shock and outrage.
Pelosi “stunned the GOP” with the move, reported an embarrassingly credulous Politico piece (7/21/21). “Both parties have attacked the other as insincere and uninterested in conducting a fair-minded examination,” mused a Washington Post report (7/21/21). “Nancy Pelosi just doomed the already tiny chances of the 1/6 committee actually mattering,” lamented CNN‘s Chris Cillizza (7/21/21).
‘Two ways of viewing the world’
It’s not just Washington politics. The right’s strategy across the board depends on falsehood and bad faith, but too many reporters refuse to acknowledge that.
The Washington Post‘s report (7/24/21) on racist incidents at a Michigan school highlighted “white parents’ growing conviction that their children are being taught to feel ashamed of their whiteness — and their country.”
The Washington Post (7/24/21) recently published a report about “a war over critical race theory” in Traverse City, Michigan. In April, a group of local white students “held a mock slave auction” on Snapchat in which they “traded” their Black peers for money. Also featured in the Snapchat: messages such as “all Blacks should die” and “let’s start another Holocaust.”
This prompted the school system in the overwhelmingly white town to fast-track an equity resolution to condemn and address racism. The Post‘s Hannah Natanson explained:
But what happened over the next two months revealed how a town grappling with an undeniable incident of racism can serve as fertile ground for the ongoing national war over whether racism is embedded in American society.
So the paper will admit that the isolated incident was undeniably racist—but not that racism is undeniably embedded in American society. Not coincidentally, that’s exactly the right’s position as well, as it attempts to steer scrutiny away from institutional racism and blame only a few “bad apples.”
The article continued:
Events in Traverse City would demonstrate how quickly efforts to address historic disparities or present-day racial harassment in schools can become fodder for a campaign against critical race theory, fueled by white parents’ growing conviction that their children are being taught to feel ashamed of their whiteness—and their country.
Note the framing: Efforts to address racism “can become fodder for” the anti-anti-racism campaign (which echoes the depiction of Pelosi rejecting bad faith Republican nominees as “a gift” to Republicans contesting the inquiry). And it’s fueled by white parents’ “growing conviction”—why is that conviction growing? Most importantly, who is responsible for its growth?
While the paper gave space to BIPOC students in the town who had experienced racism, and white students who spoke out in support of the equity resolution, it balanced those views with white adults insisting against all evidence that the town “was never racist.”
“At base, the conflict roiling Traverse City stems from two ways of viewing the world, and the town,” concluded the Post.
If a town were being flooded by rain, and some residents insisted that it couldn’t be raining because there have never been any clouds in the sky, would journalists call that a war over whether clouds existed? Would they claim that the conflict stemmed from two ways of viewing the sky, and publish quotes from both sides?
‘Equalizing the unequal’
The Washington Post‘s Margaret Sullivan (7/28/21) highlighted Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann’s admonition (Washington Post, 4/27/12) that “a balanced treatment of an unbalanced phenomenon distorts reality.”
In each instance, both-sidesing journalists bestowed unearned legitimacy on the side of the right. “They want to defend themselves against charges of bias,” observed Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan (7/28/21). “So they equalize the unequal.”
Sullivan calls for news leadership to “radically reframe the mission of its Washington coverage”:
Toss out the insidious “inside-politics” frame and replace it with a “pro-democracy” frame.
Stop calling the reporters who cover this stuff “political reporters.” Start calling them “government reporters.”
Stop asking who the winners and losers were in the latest skirmish. Start asking who is serving the democracy and who is undermining it.
To ask who is serving democracy and who is undermining it, of course, requires more than just committing to truth over claims to impartiality or “objectivity.” It would mean explicitly acknowledging right-wing lies and gaslighting—something news leaders are loath to do, imagining that their centrist ideology is bias-free (FAIR.org, 11/22/19).
The threat to US democracy did not begin with Trump, nor will it end with him. Decades of bipartisan neoliberalism have brought economic inequality to new heights (Extra!, 11/13), increasing political polarization and eroding trust in democracy. To ask who is undermining democracy requires pointing fingers not just at Republicans or racists, but also at corporate influence—of which corporate media are part and parcel.
a massive signal that racism is the systemic core of the US social/political/economic system is the yearning for, and the natural presumption that, the world should be subject to the White Supremisist, Colonial, Rules Based Order .. which is currently attempted to be stuffed down Runaway Slave China’s throat.
Yes. Quite so. And this is a ‘both sides’ issue, as Biden continues to follow the “Trump” foreign policy agenda. The Fairly Unbalanced crew at Fair conveniently ignores this and other signs of Continuity.
Both Sides of the Uniparty are run by war criminals and thugs who will literally kill millions in order to advance their agendas.
The thrust of this piece seems to be that conservatives are automatically wrong about everything, and their point of view is so invalid that it’s almost unethical to mention it, especially when it contradicts the beliefs of Twitter dwelling progressives.
I like how S. is ignoring the fact that conservatives tried to overthrow our democracy on January sixth for a corrupt gameshow host, and continue to suck up said gameshow host’s lies like pigs at a feeding trough.
Seriously, what is the conservative point of view in 2021? That climate change should be denied and ignored until it literally explodes in our faces. That racism and police brutality should be ignored no matter how many times unarmed people of color are beaten or shot to death. That Donald Trump, a criminal who has avoided consequences solely because of his status as a rich white man with powerful friends, should be allowed to openly undermine our democracy in a naked grab for power. That the most shameful chapters of our nation’s history should be withheld from our students, while monuments honoring the racist slaver insurrection of 1861 should be preserved forever.
That wearing a piece of cloth over your face in public is “tyranny”, and refusing vaccination so that Covid-19 can continue killing their fellow Americans and mutate into more dangerous variants.
Conservatives are beyond “unethical”, they are beneath contempt.
I like how “AFW1984” pretends that “our Democracy™” (sic!) was not already corrupted in 2000 when Al “I invented Everything” Gore literally chose unity with the GOP over the rights of Florida’s black (sorry, “African-American”) electorate, and that “our Democracy™” was not already a dead letter when Shillary Rotten Clinton and her gang of international criminals (including John “PNAC” Podesta) did not literally conspire (along with CNN) to “elevate” Lumpy.
Seriously – what has been the “liberal” point of view since 2009? That the ForeverWar should continue ad-infinitum? That the President should have unlimited power to literally Murder US Citizens such as Al Awlaki, without due process?
It sure is hilarious how sanctimonious “Liberals” are, given the fact that for 8 years of the Bush regime, you all screeched “Illegal war” and “War criminals” and then did a literal volte face when Obomba walked into the white house and put his slimy hands on the drone controls. If Bush had perpetrated crimes such as the **extrajudicial murder of a US CITIZEN* (of Arab descent, no less!), the howling, and fake ‘outrage’ would have been unparalleled. But when one of your own commits these crimes, you literally stayed home and watched “Survivor”.
Racism and Police Brutality did not end under Obama – who chose to have a beer summit with a racist cop, rather than confront the issue. It is significant that one of the opening acts of the Obama presidency was the police murder of Oscar Grant – where were the protests? Where were the liberals rending their clothes and pouring ashes on their heads?
You were too busy pushing through OTauzinCare – the corporatist bait-and-switch which gave us “individual mandates” without price controls. Where were “liberals” when Obama literally pulled a Dick Cheney by claiming the White House Visitor Records were “executive privilege” and thus not to be revealed to the American electorate? Where were “Liberals” when Obama was literally closeting himself in secret with the very lobbyists whom his campaign had excoriated? You were certainly not in the streets protesting police violence and racism, that’s for certain.
There are plenty of us on the genuine Left who are as sick of Liberal posturing and self-righteousness as we are of Forever Wars and the Failed Empire, which has spent untold TRILLIONS on war and militarism.
All of this focus by Corporate Liberals on “racism” is merely a ruse to divert attention from the essential continuity of foreign policy positions by both wings of the Uniparty.
Where were “liberals” when Trump/Lumpy actually attempted to end the 70 year illegal war against North Korea? Liberals sought to sabotage this effort, derailing it in order to keep the profits to the War Machine flowing.
Both Liberals and Conservatives (AKA The UniParty) are colluding in this Kabuki show, attempting to divert the public with false conflicts (masks, etc) in order to conceal the essential unity of purpose that is revealed when we examine foreign policy issues – whether it be the Biden administration’s continued support for Israeli imperialism, signified by the move of the US embassy to Jerusalem (which Biden has not, and will not reverse) to the continued support for illegal military adventures abroad – whether it be stealing Syrian oil, toppling Venezuela’s legitimately-elected government, or attempting to goad Russia into a military conflict.
Basta!
I wish that everyone would go back and read the PREAMBLE. Are we there yet?
NO—so work on that Americans and you elected ones.
I wish that Cindy Sheehan’s ghost would haunt your dreams. Nightly.
I wish that Liberals would go back and compare the campaign statements of Barky OPharma with his actual deeds while in office.
Proglodytes are “very concerned” about police brutality, but have no “concerns” at all when Barky OBomba literally awarded torturers “qualified immunity” for their heinous deeds at Guantanmo and the countless ‘black sites’ that were established under 8 years of Chocolate Reagan.
LOL Pretending that Both Sides did not support the 20 year ForeverWar that resulted in the deaths of a million Iraqis and countless (because nobody bothered to count the corpses) Afghanis.
LOL Pretending that The Uniparty (ie, the Both Sides Party) did not collude to stymie Lumpy’s attempts to decouple the US from its Forever Wars in Korea, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan et. al.
LOL Pretending that the same Uniparty (and its corporate press/public relations arm) did not mind when Lumpy took the cues and began stealing Syrian Oil (or that “Both Sides” – aka Schmoe Buyd-In Inc.) did not steal the Syrian oil).
LOL Pretending that “Both Sides” (aka, Shillary Rotten Clinton and CNN, AKA the Clinton News Network) did not collude to “Elevate” Lumpy, or that Wikileaks never made this fact known.
Fairly Unbalanced is no longer a voice of resistance – it has been co-opted and is now little more than another corporatist “fact checking” thought commissar, telling Liberals what is GoodThink and what is BadThink.
A shout-out to Julie Hollar for this excellent piece on the art of framing.
I’d love to see it developed into a series of articles, videos and/or webinars. Perhaps an illustrated book. Make the underlying principles as accessible as possible, perhaps creating infographics in an informal style like that of Sarah Lazarovic.
Then adapt this content into a series of curriculum units, free to teachers, enhanced with sample class exercises and assignments. Perhaps offer a series of art-of-framing civics lessons to Khan Academy. Let’s transform America into a nation of media critics!
I’ll bet certain foundations would gladly fund this initiative. Better yet, create a Kickstarter campaign. (After all, there’ll be deliverables for supporters and they can get recognition in the credits.)
A Kickstarter for this unusual, pro-democracy purpose could earn a lot of publicity for FAIR, which could mean more web traffic and subscribers / sustainers. That’s on top of grassroots funding for the art-of-framing initiative itself. A strong grassroots showing could then provide compelling evidence for supplemental funding from foundations.
If desired, I’d be glad to assist in, uh, framing up this concept as a tangible program and action plan.
I enjoyed the way the Kept Korporate Media (KKM) ‘framed’ Obama (AKA Chocolate Reagan) as the “good guy”, even tho he attacked journalists more than Trump ever did, and managed to push John “PNAC” Podesta out of the frame when the inconvenient fact of the Clinton Crime Family’s (CCF) efforts to Elevate Trump were exposed by Wikileaks.
Maybe that should be included in the “framing” propaganda.
Let’s face facts: The American Oligarchy (“The Oligarchy”) wanted Trump. The Oligarchy needed Trump to divert attention from the essential unity that exists behind the “framework” of the risibly-titled “Two Party” system, the facade of which had become tattered and threadbare by the end of the presidency of Chocolate Reagan, who was elected on a platform of Single Payer, Ending the Crimes of the Empire (torture e.g.) and so forth, and who, instead, doubled down on these crimes, while closeting himself with lobbyists such as Billy Tauzin – the very same corporate Republican who his team excoriated in political advertisements.
The media in this country is as corrupt as its political leadership – and this is not to be wondered at, given the fact that reporters and media are the wholly-owned subsidiaries of the same corporate establishment that owns and subsidizes these political miscreants you call “leaders.”
The only thing that will stop this is a revolution. It’s coming sooner than you realize.