Will Tuscon Change The Media's Jump-to-Assumptions?

this seemed like a better alternative than the "will sarah palin quit talking about limited government now" thread...

the media (soooo hesitant about the Ft Hood shooter) seems to have egg on it's face after it (and the local sheriff) immediately leapt to attempt to blame the Tuscon shooting on 'right wing (especially sarah palins') rhetoric'. and apparently they were completely unfounded and incorrect in doing so.

not for the first time either; lest we forget the IRS - pilot and the Times Square bomber.

however, this time The One, Their Own President Himself Who Is Sort Of Like A God has publicly remonstrated them for it (however mildly).

SO, the question is, will the media and their lefter-wing commentators have learned their lesson? or the next time a nutcase decides to kill a bunch of people, will the MSM and Krugman ask first whether or not the killer had an arabic-sounding name (in which case we need to urge caution in assigning motive) and then ask how they can pin it on those with whom they disagree?

cpwill said:

this seemed like a better alternative than the "will sarah palin quit talking about limited government now" thread...

the media (soooo hesitant about the Ft Hood shooter) seems to have egg on it's face after it (and the local sheriff) immediately leapt to attempt to blame the Tuscon shooting on 'right wing (especially sarah palins') rhetoric'. and apparently they were completely unfounded and incorrect in doing so.

not for the first time either; lest we forget the IRS - pilot and the Times Square bomber.

however, this time The One, Their Own President Himself Who Is Sort Of Like A God has publicly remonstrated them for it (however mildly).

SO, the question is, will the media and their lefter-wing commentators have learned their lesson? or the next time a nutcase decides to kill a bunch of people, will the MSM and Krugman ask first whether or not the killer had an arabic-sounding name (in which case we need to urge caution in assigning motive) and then ask how they can pin it on those with whom they disagree?

Click to expand...

I have no idea why people bother to raise these sorts of points. FOX and its right-wing commentators are hardly paragons of restraint.

Quite frankly, even if there no casual relationship between our polarized politics and this shooting, trying to reverse popular belief in such a connection would be unpopular move. Nobody can effectively hold the media responsible, so the media has no motivation to change.

Morality Games said:

I have no idea why people bother to raise these sorts of points. FOX and its right-wing commentators are hardly paragons of restraint.

Click to expand...

the only incident i can think of in this context is when the administration tried to set up a sting by firing one of their own for an edited tape; hoping that Glenn Beck would jump on it, and instead he said that he thought the woman in question was likely being mistreated.

cpwill said:

the only incident i can think of in this context is when the administration tried to set up a sting by firing one of their own for an edited tape; hoping that Glenn Beck would jump on it, and instead he said that he thought the woman in question was likely being mistreated.

Click to expand...

What context? Right-wing commentators anticipated death panels in health care reform and no such panels exist. That's the most obvious example that comes to mind, but there is a long line stretching back decades.

The only way the media learns its lesson is if their profits are hurt. In the case of FOX commentators, the idea that death panels exist is popular among their audience, so whether such panels exist or not does not matter; true or false, promoting the theory can only improve their ratings.

For the centrist-left media, it's the same situation. Pretty much everyone except conservatives are weary of the partisan-charged rhetoric, because nobody believes in politicians or political parties the way conservatives seem to believe in their politicians or political parties. The media can't "learn a lesson" from "jumping the gun" because their core audience desires the narrative they're spinning to be true.

Believing that polarized rhetoric stimulated the shooter is more appealing than believing no connection exists between the two, because the former plays into people's resentments and the latter into vaguer categories.

Pretty much the worst case scenario for the media is this; people don't ultimately believe there is a strong connection, but they won't be convinced that such an idea was totally implausible. In that case, as far as its reputation/ratings goes, the centrist-left media breaks even.

Fact is, they'll probably do better than that.

The media will not change.Anytime a Muslims commits murder or mass murder one side will rush to claim its terrorism. When a democrat or some other group libs care about is shot the liberal media will point the finger at conservative talk show hosts. And when more tragedies like this happens the anti-2nd amendment scum in the media will try to milk it to push unconstitutional laws while only giving token mention or no mention to Americans who have used guns to stop criminals.

This is another example of the stupid use of the term "the media" like it is all one big, homogeneous thing.

Redress said:

This is another example of the stupid use of the term "the media" like it is all one big, homogeneous thing.

Click to expand...

There are trends.

Redress said:

This is another example of the stupid use of the term "the media" like it is all one big, homogeneous thing.

Click to expand...

Yes, the "media" is not one thing. Some media outlets are actually quite honest, while the rest are slimy, greedy, nosy little bast***s who don't have a clue on what they're doing. However, the slimy side of the media won't change their attitudes, just like they didn't for 2 decades

Hell no, the media won't change. After Killeen, they warned us not to jump to conclusions just because the shooter was Muslim, and shouted Allah's name as he fired. Like, what could something like that possibly have to do with Islamo Terrorism?

Redress said:

This is another example of the stupid use of the term "the media" like it is all one big, homogeneous thing.

Click to expand...

"The Media" = strawman

cpwill said:

this seemed like a better alternative than the "will sarah palin quit talking about limited government now" thread...

the media (soooo hesitant about the Ft Hood shooter) seems to have egg on it's face after it (and the local sheriff) immediately leapt to attempt to blame the Tuscon shooting on 'right wing (especially sarah palins') rhetoric'. and apparently they were completely unfounded and incorrect in doing so.

not for the first time either; lest we forget the IRS - pilot and the Times Square bomber.

however, this time The One, Their Own President Himself Who Is Sort Of Like A God has publicly remonstrated them for it (however mildly).

SO, the question is, will the media and their lefter-wing commentators have learned their lesson? or the next time a nutcase decides to kill a bunch of people, will the MSM and Krugman ask first whether or not the killer had an arabic-sounding name (in which case we need to urge caution in assigning motive) and then ask how they can pin it on those with whom they disagree?

Click to expand...

I think so, yes. Certain people on the professional left have a little egg on their face, and while they may not want to admit it, I think they will probably be more cautious in at least the near future. I can't make any promises, though, for the random annonymous bloggers and commentors on blogs, who were the quickest to allege the erroneous connections, and the most vehement of them.

Clearly, judging by the other thread, however, the right is just as eager to jump to conclusions based on nothing. But some people cannot separate discussion of consequences of what has happened from a discussion of who was right and who was wrong in allowing it to happen.

??? said:

I think so, yes. Certain people on the professional left have a little egg on their face, and while they may not want to admit it, I think they will probably be more cautious in at least the near future. I can't make any promises, though, for the random annonymous bloggers and commentors on blogs, who were the quickest to allege the erroneous connections, and the most vehement of them.

Clearly, judging by the other thread, however, the right is just as eager to jump to conclusions based on nothing. But some people cannot separate discussion of consequences of what has happened from a discussion of who was right and who was wrong in allowing it to happen.

Click to expand...

which other thread? the will sarah palin change one?

cpwill said:

which other thread? the will sarah palin change one?

Click to expand...

Yes. Not that I'm bitter or anything. lol

pbrauer said:

"The Media" = strawman

Click to expand...

Just like your post. There were plenty in the media and elsewhere jumping on the "rhetoric" bandwagon. It was wrong to do so before they had the facts. Another Dan Rather momemt for the MSM.

cpwill said:

this seemed like a better alternative than the "will sarah palin quit talking about limited government now" thread...

the media (soooo hesitant about the Ft Hood shooter) seems to have egg on it's face after it (and the local sheriff) immediately leapt to attempt to blame the Tuscon shooting on 'right wing (especially sarah palins') rhetoric'. and apparently they were completely unfounded and incorrect in doing so.

not for the first time either; lest we forget the IRS - pilot and the Times Square bomber.

however, this time The One, Their Own President Himself Who Is Sort Of Like A God has publicly remonstrated them for it (however mildly).

SO, the question is, will the media and their lefter-wing commentators have learned their lesson? or the next time a nutcase decides to kill a bunch of people, will the MSM and Krugman ask first whether or not the killer had an arabic-sounding name (in which case we need to urge caution in assigning motive) and then ask how they can pin it on those with whom they disagree?

Click to expand...

Nope. The pressure presented to journalists by 24/7 news channels will always tend to result in poor journalism.

Whoever knows what this is gets a cookie :mrgreen:

cpwill said:

… the media (soooo hesitant about the Ft Hood shooter) seems to have egg on it's face after it (and the local sheriff) immediately leapt to attempt to blame the Tuscon shooting on 'right wing (especially sarah palins') rhetoric'. and apparently they were completely unfounded and incorrect in doing so.

not for the first time either; lest we forget the IRS - pilot and the Times Square bomber.

however, this time The One, Their Own President Himself Who Is Sort Of Like A God has publicly remonstrated them for it (however mildly).

SO, the question is, will the media and their lefter-wing commentators have learned their lesson? or the next time a nutcase decides to kill a bunch of people, will the MSM and Krugman ask first whether or not the killer had an arabic-sounding name (in which case we need to urge caution in assigning motive) and then ask how they can pin it on those with whom they disagree?

Click to expand...

You offer lots of accusations, but, you don't provide the foundations for any of them. You assume you're right so no shows of evidence for your premises are required. Aren't you acting in precisely the way you claim ‘the media’ is behaving? I rather think so.

People in the media are always caught up in the latest dramatics. Their memories are rather short-term. Speculation has become one of their favorite bits. Once in a while self-reflection comes around, but whenever it does, it seems rather limited and self-congratulatory-as if they expect the audience to marvel at their collective brilliance and sense of ethics while demonstrating nothing worthy of even a back-handed compliment.