Ben Shapiro
On Monday, former chief
foreign affairs correspondent for CBS News Lara Logan dropped a bombshell on
the media: she told retired Navy SEAL Mike Ritland that the media are wildly
biased to the political Left. “This interview is professional suicide for me,”
she stated, after agreeing with Ritland that most major media are “absurdly
left-leaning.” She stated:
The media everywhere is mostly liberal, not just in the U.S. But in
this country, 85% of journalists are registered Democrats – that’s just a fact. No one is
registering Democrat when they’re really a Republican. So, the facts are on the
side that you just stated: most journalists are Left, or liberal, or Democrat,
or whatever word you wanna give it. How do you know you’re being lied to? How
do you know you’re being manipulated? How do you know there’s something not
right with the coverage? When they simplify it all and there’s no gray. There’s
no gray. It’s all one way. Well, life isn’t like that. If it doesn’t match real
life, it’s probably not — there’s something wrong.
Compare Logan’s accurate take
on the media with the words of opinion writer Jonathan Capehart of The Washington
Post and MSNBC, who described the media’s wild malfeasance on the
Jussie Smollett story this way:
Just the circumstances and the way he told the story, and what he said
happened to him sort of fit in with a narra -- not a narrative, but a reality
for a lot of people in this country since President Trump was inaugurated, that
there is an atmosphere of menace and an atmosphere of hate around the country
that made it possible for people to either readily believe or want to believe
Jussie Smollett.
Capehart’s Freudian slip is
actually rather important. He was correct that many in the media granted
credibility to Smollett’s hoax because it fit a narrative. But then he
corrected himself to state that it wasn’t a narrative at all – it was a
“reality for a lot of people in this country.”
Now, this slip is fascinating
because it reveals the unfortunate truth about many media members on the
political Left: they mistake their narrative for truth. Opinion becomes fact.
Those who disagree with a given “fact” – fact which is actually opinion – are
then labeled ignorant, or foolish, or malevolent.
Is this an innocent mistake, a
matter of mere confirmation bias to which we are all prone? Or is something
deeper going on?
Since the 1960s, the radical
Left has claimed that most human interactions are governed by power dynamics.
Critical theory suggests, for example, that free markets aren’t actually
voluntaristic arrangements of individuals engaging in mutually beneficial trade
– they’re a reflection of hierarchical arrangements created by the rich. Thus,
critical theorists suggest that a regulated market controlled by “the people” –
progressives – would properly rejigger economic relationships. Similarly,
critical theory suggests that free speech isn’t actually free – it’s a system
set up by those who have powerful distribution mechanisms for their speech at
the expense of others. Thus, critical theorists suggest, along the lines of
Herbert Marcuse, that certain opinions must be silenced in order to even the
playing field – “repressive tolerance” must be applied.
If you believe in such
critical theory, you aren’t likely to be shy about the application of your own
political power to these supposedly hierarchical systems. After all, if you
believe that systems of speech and economics are constructed by the powerful,
then you should use every means at your disposal to act against them. If you
can blame some nefarious right-wing forces using hidden mechanisms of power for
all the systems you don’t like, then you can use institutional power to tear
away at those systems.
Thus, media bias becomes not
an evil, or even an error to be mitigated, but an affirmative good.
Objectivity, in the critical theory framework, is an illusion used by certain
powers against other powers; thus, the illusion of objectivity can and should
be used by more legitimate powers on behalf of certain political interests.
Most members of the media
surely don’t think like this; most members of the media probably fall prey to
confirmation bias rather than ideological self-justification. But the continued
insistence by members of our media that they are not prone to such confirmation
bias, when they so obviously are, suggests that at a certain point,
confirmation bias shades over into affirmative enjoyment of Leftist power
politics. And that is truly dangerous, because
politically-motivated players using the façade of objectivity to press forward
an agenda aren’t journalists at all. They’re simply liars.
Ben Shapiro, The Daily Wire, 19-2-2019
Há cerca de uma hora assisti a uma entrevista da Lara Logan no programa do Hannity. Ela reprisou o que está dito acima pelo Ben Shapiro, jovem de rara cultura e descortino. No Brasil, a participação da esquerda, em todos os seus matises, na imprensa talvez seja maior ainda.
ResponderExcluirLara Logan doubles down on media bias claims on 'Hannity'
ExcluirPara quem assistiu "House of the Cards" o seriado é brincadeira de criança no Brasil.
ResponderExcluirTerminei de ler "The Best Laid Plans" por Sidney Sheldon, no Brasil seria matéria de primário.
Esse país tem poucos conservadores, a maioria é de liberais políticos sem éticas e morais.
Se nossa constituição tivesse o mesmo número de artigos da americana, certamente teríamos mais de 1000 emendas para, alem de uma para cada um que se acha minoria.
Só falta ter "idosocídio", "aposentadocídio" matricídio, parricídio e fratricídio com leis e estatutos diferenciados.
Ou então chamar idoso de velho, aposentados de vagabundo, como discriminação.
Nosso STF é bando de proxenetas e cafetinas do silogismo confuso.
fui...