Do Words Matter? Yes

Do Words Matter? Yes

– By Tom Garrison –

There is a book every American ought to read—Bernard Goldberg’s Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News. His thesis is that what we now call the mainstream media (MSM)—ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and print media such as the New York Times and the Washington Post)—is extremely biased in favor of liberalism and the Left.

That is certainly not news to most people. What is interesting is that he wrote this 20 years ago. Lest you think Goldberg is simply some disgruntled conservative venting against liberals/the Left, here is a short biography. Goldberg worked for CBS News as a reporter and producer for 28 years (1972 to 2000), he won seven Emmy Awards for excellence in television reporting, and in his book, he says he never voted for a Republican presidential candidate.

The short version of the cause of this bias is that the vast majority of producers, editors, reporters and on-camera personalities live and work in an elitist liberal/leftist ideological bubble. Their work interactions are almost exclusively with other liberals; all their friends are liberals, and so on. Virtually all of them think the same way about big social and political issues. As Goldberg writes, “After a while, they start to believe that all civilized people think the same way they and their friends do. That’s why they don’t simply disagree with conservatives. They see them as morally deficient” (emphasis added).

Should we just accept Goldberg’s word? No, let’s examine some evidence. Political party affiliation is a rough indicator of one’s political leaning. Not all Democrats are leftists, but all leftists support Democrats.

In 1990, for example, research by Washington City Paper (a weekly newspaper serving the District of Columbia), showed only one registered Republican (a sportswriter) among 49 top editors, reporters, and columnists at the Washington Post. That is a lot of diversity—not.

Survey research indicates that in 1971 nearly 26 percent of all US journalists were registered, Republicans. By 2013 that percentage had dropped to 7.1 (less than the percentage of Republicans in San Francisco that year).

A 2020 nationwide poll of nearly 1,700 journalists found that of those who identified with a political party/ideology, 80% said they were Democrats/liberals. The survey’s authors wrote, “On average, journalists in our samples are far to the left … and even to the left of prominent liberal politicians like former President Barack Obama.”

For decades, there clearly has been a Democrat/liberal/leftist slant on how journalists self-identify. As one would expect, this disparity is strongest in large urban areas, especially the epicenters of print and broadcast journalism, New York and Washington, DC. The journalists in those two cities often set the tone for news reporting in the rest of the country.

If this bias did not influence reporting, who cares? Unfortunately, the liberal/Left bias seeps into and often dominates news reporting in terms of what is reported, what is ignored, and the way stories are reported.

I could present a lengthy list (scores, nay hundreds of examples) of misinformation and outright lies the mainstream media has pushed in the last few decades. Remember the Duke la crosse team? In 2006 three white members of the lacrosse team were falsely accused of raping a black woman. Even though it was apparent from early on that the accuser was lying, the media kept the story alive for months by hyping racism and sexual violence. Finally, in April 2007, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper dropped all charges declaring the three lacrosse players “innocent.”

The MSM loves to distort or outright lie about any newsworthy alleged “crime” by a white person.

Fast forward a few years to the “Russian collusion” hoax—the belief that Donald Trump and his associates conspired with Russian officials to influence the 2016 presidential campaign. The Mueller investigation, named after special prosecutor Robert Mueller, investigated the Trump campaign activities for nearly two years (May 2017 to March 2019). Months before the official investigation and many months after its completion, the MSM hammered Trump and associates daily for alleged “Russian collusion.”

The original driving force underlying the investigation was the infamous Steele dossier which supposedly revealed nefarious links between Trump and his associates and Russia. Very early on, some responsible journalists pointed out the various inconsistencies and lies in the dossier. Did this deter the MSM? Nope, but it should have.

After spending tens of millions of dollars and conducting hundreds of interviews, the Mueller Report concluded, “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” Did that stop the MSM in its relentless anti-Trump campaign? Unfortunately not.

Finally, nearly five years after the release of the Steele dossier and more than 2 ½ years after the Mueller Report, CNN, perhaps the prime driver of the Russian collusion hoax, published a story titled, “The Steele Dossier: A Reckoning.” CNN reporter Marshall Cohen wrote, “Legitimate questions are now being raised about the dossier—how it was used by Democrats as a political weapon against Trump, how it was handled by the FBI and US intelligence agencies, and how it was portrayed by the media” (emphasis added).

In the thick of the “Russian collusion” hoax, the MSM got another chance to get it right and failed miserably. Consider the case of Kyle Rittenhouse. The facts are: On August 25, 2020, Rittenhouse was asked to guard a used car lot in Kenosha, Wisconsin, from violent and often armed Black Lives Matter protesters. He was chased and attacked by at least three white rioters. He shot and killed two and wounded the third. At his murder trial in November 2021, Rittenhouse was acquitted of all charges.

How did the media handle this? MSNBC’s Joy Reid slammed Rittenhouse as an “armed teenage vigilante.” The facts are he tried to flee his attackers, was defending himself and did not initiate the violence.

MSNBC’s Joe Scarbrough said Rittenhouse “…drove across state lines with an AR-15 and started shooting people up.” Another lie. The rifle was safely stored at a friend’s stepfather’s house in Kenosha.

There are many other outright lies spread by the MSM. Perhaps the most damaging was multiple media outlets calling Rittenhouse a “white supremacist” after presidential candidate Joe Biden ran a video alleging Rittenhouse to be one without offering any evidence. To this day, there is no evidence linking Rittenhouse to white supremacy.

A big problem is that the facts were available shortly after the incident, and the MSM continued to spread lies for months.

Well, you say, maybe this Garrison guy is full of it and spreading counter-lies. Okay. If what I write is not true, then why did former New York Times writer and editor Bari Weiss write about the Rittenhouse case, “This wasn’t a disinformation campaign waged by Reddit trolls or anonymous Twitter accounts. It was one pushed by the mainstream media and members of Congress for the sake of an expedient political narrative ….”

Perhaps even more insidious than the big-time lies and misinformation is how the MSM works diligently to manipulate minds by manipulating words.

I assume everyone reading this reads some sort of news. Did you know that the Associated Press (AP) Style Book, followed by almost all newspapers and certainly every AP story, promotes institutionalized racism? It does.

Read any AP story wherein the race of people is relevant and mentioned. If the person is white and that fact is mentioned, the “w” in white is lowercase (w). If a person is black and that fact is mentioned, the “b” in black is upper case (B). Both words describe a person’s race. Why the difference? Why no consistency?

Here is the relevant section from the AP Style Book:

Black(s), white(s) (n.) Do not use either term as a singular noun. For plurals, phrasing such as Black people, white people, Black teachers, and white students is often preferable when clearly relevant.

Imagine the outrage if that was reversed. What can possibly justify treating white and black people differ in how they are described? There is no rational, logical reason for this. It is an absurdity and systemic racism against white people.

Gosh, it’s almost like white people are relegated to the back of the grammar bus as second-class citizens simply because of skin color. Evidently, disrespecting white folks is no big deal, while disrespecting black people is a very big deal.

Examine the words used by both sides in the debate over illegal aliens. A few years ago, the MSM called illegal aliens undocumented workers. “Undocumented”—it seems to indicate these folks merely forgot the documents showing they are legal residents. Or this is really a small bureaucratic mix-up, and they simply did not obtain proper documentation—haven’t we all had a bad experience with a government bureaucracy? Undocumented is a much “softer” description than illegal.

How about the “worker” part of undocumented workers? How do we know they are workers? They could be terrorists. They could be, and some are, pregnant women hoping to have their child on US soil to create an anchor baby. They could be, and some are, smugglers of drugs or people. They could be, and some are, children too young to work. And the ones who are potential workers are just that, “potential workers” unless they have a guaranteed job in this country—very unlikely. Therefore, to call these people workers is only true for a very small minority, while the label illegal alien is always correct.

Recently the MSM has taken to labeling illegal aliens as migrants. The word migrant refers to those who move from one place to another in search of work or better living conditions. Immigrant refers to those who have moved to foreign countries permanently for work or living. Using migrant totally ignores the illegal crossing of international borders.

The use of illegal aliens defines the problem in legal terms—the person is in this country illegally, and they are not a US citizen or legal foreign resident. They are illegal since proper entry procedures were not followed. And they are aliens in that they are not US citizens or legal foreign residents.

In our modern woke climate, the phrase illegal alien conjures up a certain harshness—these people are lawbreakers. However harsh it may sound to some, it is an accurate statement of fact.

When was the last time the MSM described a leftist or leftist organization as such? Seldom if ever. Leftists and extreme liberals are rarely given a descriptive adjective. Ever seen Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, or Chuck Schumer described as an extreme liberal? Or leftist? Does not happen. Liberal or Left is the default position for the isolated elite media. A leftist is no big deal to them.

Goldberg sums it up nicely in this quote from his book, “The sophisticated liberal/Left media elites don’t categorize their beliefs as liberal/left but simply the correct way to look at things” (emphasis in original). So, if your bias is simply the correct way to look at the world, then Nancy Pelosi and her ilk are just correct mainstream moderates.

Look at 2020. For months riots, causing one to two billion dollars in damages, much of it in minority communities (this estimate does not include the long-term economic impact), and at least 9 people killed, racked American cities. Many, probably most, of these riots were instigated by Black Lives Matter and Antifa organizers. Both are avowedly far Left groups. Do you ever remember either group being described by the MSM as even Left, much less far Left? Didn’t happen.

On the other hand, anyone or any organization, even a bit conservative, is almost always described as a right winger or extreme conservative. Hell, taking his cue from the MSM, President Biden, in a speech recently (August 25, 2022), categorized millions of Americans as “semi-fascist” because they disagreed with him.

Why does all this matter? Because words matter—they shape and reflect our thinking and guide our behavior. And there is a feedback loop—what words are used, along with their connotative meanings and structure, and reinforce our thinking about the topic. It sounds esoteric, but this is crucial for political discourse. The words used to discuss an issue go far in determining public policy concerning that topic.

Funny how all the MSM disinformation, outright lies, and word manipulation always follow the liberal/Left narrative. You’d almost think the MSM is the propaganda wing of the Democrat Party. What I find disheartening is that tens of millions of Americans believed, and I imagine most still believe, the misinformation and lies promulgated by the MSM for decades.

While we do not yet live in a 1984ish dystopian society, many of our leading institutions are headed that way. What is the solution?

How about something as simple as being fair? What if journalists did real in-depth research that examined both (or all) sides of an issue with an open mind? Don’t give rumors, innuendo, and questionable reports from “unnamed sources” hours and hours of time on news broadcasts. All you liberal/leftist journalists, would it kill you to withhold judgment and put aside your bias until all relevant facts are known?

References

Cadelago, Christopher and Olivia Olander. “Biden Calls Trump’s Philosophy ‘Semi-Fascist.’” Politico. August 25, 2022. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/25/biden-trump-philosophy-semi-fascism-00053831

Cohen, Marshall. “The Steele Dossier: A Reckoning.” CNN Politics website. November 18, 2021. https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/18/politics/steele-dossier-reckoning/index.html

Gold, Hadas. “On Media.” Politico website. May 6, 2014. https://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/05/survey-7-percent-of-reporters-identify-as-republican-188053

Goldberg, Bernard. Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News. Perennial. New York, 2002.

Hassell, Hans, John Holbein, and Matthews Miles. “Journalists May be Liberal, but this Doesn’t Affect Which Candidates They Choose to Cover.” The Washington Post. April 10, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/04/10/journalists-may-be-liberal-this-doesnt-affect-which-candidates-they-choose-cover/

Herman, Marisa and Maxwell Newman. “20 Biggest Media Lies in the Rittenhouse Case.” Newsmax. September 15, 2022. https://www.newsmax.com/us/rittenhouse/2021/11/23/id/1045919/?ns_mail_uid=e93185e1-46d9-47ed-ba0d-15aec200e829&ns_mail_job=DM277514_11232021&s=acs&dkt_nbr=010504lpenle

Johnson, Ben. “CNN: The Credibility of the ‘Steele Dossier’ Has ‘Significantly Diminished.’ Network Now Has ‘Legitimate Questions.’” The Daily Wire. November 24, 2021. https://www.dailywire.com/news/cnn-the-credibility-of-the-steele-dossier-has-significantly-diminished-network-now-has-legitimate-questions?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=benshapiro&fbclid=IwAR3msNPaQmEVGRsIxF32_YT6gCT0usXCbDXaH_AfzD0mhX9BGegyejofI8s

Kelly, Julie. “Retract Every Russian Collusion Story and Fire Everyone Who Wrote Them.” American Greatness. November 15, 2021. https://amgreatness.com/2021/11/15/retract-every-russian-collusion-story-and-fire-everyone-who-wrote-them/

Nolte, John. “Nolte: Lying Media Forced to Issue Humiliating Kyle Rittenhouse Corrections. Breitbart. November 24, 2021. https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2021/11/24/nolte-lying-media-forced-to-issue-humiliating-kyle-rittenhouse-corrections/?fbclid=IwAR1YGCjnNPe2qpbD_Uonue9LeR0WgrVfoSbRG81FC9YS6rjiaiCrj3sit0I

Polumbo, Brad. “George Floyd Riots Caused Record Setting $2 billion in Damage, New Report Says. Here’s Why the True Cost is Even Higher. Foundation for Economic Education. September 16, 2020. https://fee.org/articles/george-floyd-riots-caused-record-setting-2-billion-in-damage-new-report-says-here-s-why-the-true-cost-is-even-higher/

Sullivan, Andrew. “When All the Media Narratives Collapse.” The Weekly Dish. November 12, 2021. https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/when-all-the-media-narratives-collapse-650

Wemple, Erik. “Dear Mainstream Media: Why So Liberal?” The Washington Post. January 27, 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/01/27/dear-mainstream-media-why-so-liberal/

Weiss, Bari. “The Media’s Verdict on Kyle Rittenhouse.” Common Sense. November 17, 2021. https://www.commonsense.news/p/the-medias-verdict-on-kyle-rittenhouse

Wikipedia. “Duke Lacrosse Case.” Last modified September 10, 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case

Wikipedia. “The First Impeachment of Donald Trump.” Last modified September 7, 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_impeachment_of_Donald_Trump

Wikipedia. “George Floyd Protests.” Last modified September 18, 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests

Wikipedia. “Special Counsel Investigation (2017-2019).” Last modified September 6, 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017%E2%80%932019)

Viewpoints and perspectives expressed throughout The Independent are those of the individual contributors. They do not necessarily reflect those held by the staff of The Independent or our advertising sponsors. Your comments, rebuttals, and contributions are welcome in accordance with our Terms of Service. Please be respectful and abide by our Community Rules. If you have privacy concerns you can view our Privacy Policy here. Thank you! 

Click here to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or a Letter to the Editor