Ever since President Donald Trump took office, the mainstream media has made a sport out of ripping him to shreds.
Clear patterns have emerged over that time as well. While the press hasn’t backed off of its anti-Trump narrative, the faux outrage and over-the-top hysteria has ebbed and flowed.
There have been certain times when the media has really overextended itself in the areas of hyperbole and negativity. If we think back to the very height of the nonsense Russia story for a moment, that pattern is crystal clear.
Every day, there was a drip-drip-drip of information, and then the bomb went off. All of a sudden, the media kicked it up a notch and convicted Trump before anyone could even wrap their heads around why he was being investigated in the first place.
During the peak, the New York Times and Washington Post took turns dropping so-called ‘bombshell’ stories. These stories would be dropped right before the workday ended on the East Coast. This was not a coincidence.
By doing this, it was insured that all of the network news broadcasts would be completely devoted to the ‘bombshell.’ By extension, the primetime hours on cable news were dominated by the latest salacious story.
Something funny happened to each and every one of these stories. As folks began really looking at them and digging into them, it would turn out there was nothing there. As in absolutely nothing.
The media laughably took information from highly questionable sources and presented them as concrete facts. Once the stories were exposed as nothing more than hearsay, there was no retraction or attempt to correct the record. It was on to the next bombshell, and the cycle repeated itself.
As we’re all well aware, the Russia narrative presented by the press was complete nonsense. Even the media isn’t singing that song all that much anymore, but they’ve found a new topic to get hysterical about.
The media’s hysteria over Trump’s Charlottesville remarks has followed the same pattern. As opposed to phantom sources, the media has attempted to use Trump’s own words for a ‘gotcha’ moment.
Look back to the coverage over the height of the hysteria. Regardless of what the president had to say, the media had a canned response at the ready. Coincidence?
After the initial shredding, it was time to parse each one of Trump’s words to find the ‘gotcha.’ To pull that trick, Trump’s words were disturbingly taken out of context and presented in the fashion that fit the narrative.
If you smell something rotten with the media these days, you’re not alone.
The Daily Wire passes along the thoughts Dilbert creator Scott Adams, who had a famous presidential prediction in 2016, and he feels the same way.
“If you hold a mass protest against your biggest nemesis and your nemesis tweets a sincere thank you and applauds your efforts, you are doing it wrong.”
That was the succinct summation offered over the weekend by Scott Adams, the cartoonist who draws the Dilbert comic strip and an outspoken conservative who holds court regularly on the interwebs, often on Periscope.
Adams is not a big fan of how things are being presented inside of the bubble.
“Outside the bubble, where most of you are and I hope I am, it seems to me that President Trump has always been pro-American — of every kind — which would mean pro-equal opportunity, no bias, love everybody. And it seems to me he’s been saying it consistently since the beginning. So when he tweets like he did today, ‘I applaud you for protesting against hate and bigotry,’ it was completely in keeping with what we understand outside the bubble to be the way he always talks,” Adams said.
“If you’re inside the bubble, and you’re absolutely sure that we just elected a Nazi whose main mission in life is bigotry and hate, why did he just applaud us for protesting him? How’s that make sense?”
It’s a pretty simple point that demonstrates the absurdity of the whole thing. The president is not a white supremacist, he has never been one, and he will never be one.
Why would the media insist on pushing that false narrative?
There are folks out there with extremist views, there’s no denying that. There is some divisiveness in the country. There’s also no denying that.
However, it’s highly questionable as to why the media would feel the need to further inflame tensions and portray it as if extremists have taken over our nation.
Is there not one person that sits inside an editorial meeting of a mainstream outlet that thinks they may be going too far?
Why is there no thought given to the damage that’s done by constantly inflaming racial tensions?
That’s a pair of simple questions that it would be lovely to have some clarity on.
Source: The Daily Wire