fearlesshistory

Typically throughout the political process, there are denunciations of the so-called “Mainstream Press.” Conspiracy theorists of every stripe (both left and right) rail against the “Bias” of “Mainstream media” and turn to “alternative” news sources. There is a problem with “alternative” news sources; peer review and fact-checking. In “mainstream media” gross misrepresentations have repercussions; for instance, what happened to Dan Rather and his faulty sources on George Bush’s military record in 2004? Mr. Rather was forced to apologize on air and was eventually ousted from CBS for his transgressions. Similarly, Jayson Blair who made up stories for the New York Times and Stephen Glass who made up stories for New Republic were dismissed from their jobs. Why? Because other journalists, historians, political scientists, and other fact-checkers used documented evidence to prove the claims made by these journalists were false. Not that the “media” should get a free pass, given that they rested on official White House press releases for much of their reportage before the invasion of Iraq, but eventually evidence did come to light by scholars and journalists which forced the major outlets to admit that they were wrong.

Fringe media, on the other hand, is beholden to no one, not even reality, documented evidence or (one would suspect) common decency. For instance, on the subject of now-infamous ACORN voter registrations, “conservative” pundit Grover Norquist writes about the “fraud” that was “facilitated” by President-elect Barack Obama. This has been one of the many theories that have circulated on “Fringe” media with endless hysteria and fear-mongering without a scrap of evidence to support it; no documents proving the complicity of ACORN - even though they were registering Democrats in Republican-controlled states - have ever come to light. Here’s the problem; in order for voter fraud to have occurred, the leadership of ACORN would have had to tried to conceal the false names, then tried to pass employees or hirelings off as “Donald Duck” or “Clark Kent” at the voting booths. In fact, as has been pointed out on NBC, CBS, BBC, NPR, and dozens of other media outlets, ACORN pointed out the sketchy names to the appropriate elections officials in the various states. In fact, ACORN even highlighted the false registrations in order to facilitate investigations and eliminations by the various state agencies. ACORN is not allowed, under any circumstances, to purge any voter name from any rolls - only state agencies can do that after proper investigation; even someone who signed “I. P. Freely” or “Seymour Butts” would remain on the rolls, but would be tagged for official investigation. On the leftist side, there are still theories that Ronald Reagan set up a tentative weapons deal with the Iranians before the election to ensure that Carter would not be able to negotiate a release of the hostages before the election. The truth is that the Iranians had just come into a ton of top-notch American weaponry and were sitting pretty as the war with Iraq had not even started yet, so Iran was still in control of one of the most powerful Air Forces and Armies in the Persian Gulf, so why would they even try to make a deal with a candidate they had no idea would even win the election? Some versions of these rumors have George H. W. Bush flying in an SR-71 to Tehran to meet with the Ayatollah! Other rumors such as the “Muslim” background of Obama were started by a man who has been diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic, and yet still get play in neoconservative circles.

So why do these outlandish rumor-mongers still accrue a following of self-feeding devotees?  Two reasons; they do not undergo a true peer review; that is people who are trained investigators and documentarians who look at the news and analyze it critically. Instead they rely upon a mob mentality that supports everything unequivocally and those who criticize certain assertions (like Obama is going to turn the country Muslim/Communist/Socialist/over to terrorists) are decried as apologists, excuse-makers, or traitors to the country (or worse as “mainstream media”). Second, these pundits play to fear and use a tiny smidgen of truth to “spin” events to fit their pathos or dogma. If a person is afraid of a well-educated black man, they are unwilling to admit that the color of his skin is the reason for their unease at electing him so latch onto other, more comfortable excuses to prop up their preconceptions (he’s going to ruin the country, he’s a Liberal, he’s a radiacl Muslim, etc.) - nobody wants to admit to being racist; few people think of themselves as racist and know that such a label is “bad;” nobody identifies themselves as “bad” people. If a person is unwilling to elect a rich white man, they are equally unwilling to admit that his social status or priveleged lifestyle are the reasons they feel uncomfortable and so latch onto similar reasons not to vote for him. Same with religion (Mormon, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, etc.), gender, sexual orientation, or other marker of “otherness” that is un-politically correct to admit to in this day and age.

In summation; “Mainstream Media” is not a dirty word nor does it automatically indicate corruption. “Bias” is an illusory trope used by pundits to split the world into two opposing viewpoints - the reality is we all have our “biases” and we all operate under those, the trick is to understand your bias and try to overcome it by listening and reading and using your mind. And, finally, the alternative to “mainstream media” is “fringe” media and there is no better example of fringe media than HERE ; is that place really where you want to get your news and ideas from?

Go forth, then and read, argue, open your mind, and think beyond the sound bites and rhetoric. Oh, and always check the sources (they have to be reputable, not Blogs, not podcasts, not transcripts of op-eds)!

QED