Liberal media political bias (especially against presidents of the opposite political leaning) is nothing new. What is new is the veracity and nasty intent of the reporting that is going and has been going on through this election and post election year. Vicious attacks on President Trump and his family, misleading if not straight up lying headlines on the front page, and “breaking news” based on probabilities and rumors but reported as fact has become the new norm. In this series we will look through examples of extreme media bias, the cause of this extremism and how it’s impacting our world today.
If you want an example of ridiculous media bias look no further than this past election night. Once the numbers came rolling in, and it became clear that Donald Trump was to be the 45th president of the United States, hysteria broke out on mainstream news channels. Rachel Meadows of MSNBC broke down crying live on the set and said “You are awake by the way you’re not having a terrible terrible dream also you’re not dead and you haven’t gone to hell this is our election now this is us this is our country. Also heard on MSNBC “deeper concerns tonight that the world’s shining light of democracy has gone dark”. CNN called it “a whitelash” and “a mourning moment” “a push back against african-americans” insinuating racist reasons for the victory, even comparing him to Nazism and slavery. Another CNN host questioned how “he could possibly tuck in his child at night knowing Donald Trump is president”. Going off of these quotes you would’ve thought that the devil himself was elected president and that the world was going to end. How a mainstream network can put out narratives like this and claim that they are not biased is insane and just makes no sense at all.
Click on link below to see full highlights of Election night bias.
The anti Trump media campaign didn’t start at election night though. First there was the scandal where CNN asked the DNC about what questions to ask Mr. Trump during an interview. The media covered this up by saying they also asked Republicans but put forth no evidence. Then of course there’s the other huge CNN scandal where contributor Donna Brazile leaked the CNN debate questions to Sec. Clinton to review during the debate. Other reporters asked for approval on their stories from the Clinton Campaign (a big no-no for reporting).
How do these media outlets justify this? Well they try to use “false equivalency”. False equivalency means that they have to be biased against Trump because they believe him to be such a threat to our country that comparing him to Hillary on an equal playing field would be a disservice to the american people. The New York Times argued this in a column saying “If you’re a working journalist and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-american dictators, and that he would be dangerous with the United States nuclear codes, how the heck are you supposed to cover him” They conclude that reporters can’t cover him fairly and that they should take a stance against him. This argument has also been made on CNN and Vox. This is a new low for american reporting, where a reporter can let his own personal feelings dictate how he reports and cause him/her to cross the line from biased writing to what we’d see in the China Daily or Pravda.