Dizzy was right

By

Filed Under General on Oct 6 

Six years ago, I wrote an article explaining that liberal media bias is not as obvious as one might think. Often, what the media don’t say is as important as what they do. I used Dizzy Gillespie as an example:

“Trumpeter John “Dizzy” Gillespie was one of jazz’s all-time great performers. With his colorful on-stage antics and trademark bent-bell horn, Gillespie was widely recognized as a prime architect of the influential be-bop movement of the 1940’s and 50’s and he remained a vital force in jazz right up until his death in 1993. Once, when asked how his playing always sounded so fresh and creative, he answered with his characteristically dry wit, “It ain’t the notes you play that count, man. It’s the ones you leave out.”

Fast-forward to October 2011: Dizzy’s point is especially relevant as it applies to the coverage of today’s major issues. The degree to which certain stories are covered by the media—or ignored completely—has a tremendous influence on the public’s perception of people and events.

Take for example the case of the Occupy Wall Street movement by liberal protesters. The liberal MSM is trying to portray them as a cutting-edge, pulse-of-the-country voice against the excesses of corrupt capitalism. The Occupy group is presented as having clear, laudable ideals for economic equality through a restructuring of how our American economy works, away from unlimited, uninhibited individual potential and achievement and towards a more socialistic-style wealth redistribution model.

In reality, it seems as if a great swath of Occupiers has no real idea of why they’re there at all, other than to party, protest (what, exactly, isn’t clear, besides not having to pay back their student loans), fight with police and talk to each other on their (profit-driven, capitalistic) iPhones. But to listen to the major networks report it, this is a major, significant, important movement in American culture and politics. No other angle is presented.

Attorney General Eric Holder’s apparent contradictory statements with regard to his knowledge of ATF’s “Fast and Furious” program are getting similar kid-glove treatment from the liberal MSM. A brief re-cap: Fast and Furious was an ill-conceived program to sell U.S. guns to Mexican drug kingpins in the hopes that those guns could be traced and the drug lords found and prosecuted. It went horribly wrong, too many guns ended up in the hands of truly bad people, and US personnel were killed in the process. The ATF is overseen by the US Justice Department, of which Holder, as AG, is chief.

At a May 2011 Congressional hearing, Holder disavowed any long-term knowledge of the program, saying, “I probably heard about it [Fast and Furious] for the first time in the last few weeks.”

But CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson (good for her, and confirming a long-held view that the only thing the MSM like more than negatively portraying conservatives is uncovering scandals that justify their—the MSM’s—existence) discovered e-mail memos from ten months ago that seem to unequivocally prove that Holder was in the loop right from the beginning. Now, CBS is circling the wagons, refusing—without explanation—to allow Attkinson to give any interviews to other news outlets.

Nonetheless, this is big trouble for Holder and a major blow to the Obama Administration’s credibility, especially following so closely on the heels of their Solyndra solar panel loan debacle. This is the same half-billion dollar waste of taxpayer money debacle that has been buried by the MSM to the point where virtually no “average” person has any awareness of it. That song gets no airplay.

Liberal MSM bias is a cumulative effect. It’s not just one arbitrary source and it’s not as obvious as, say, Brian Williams or Jon Stewart saying that he doesn’t like Mitt Romney. It’s more subtle. Like Dizzy said, what they don’t say is just as important and influential as what they do say.

The liberal MSM don’t say anything equal and equivalent to their negative descriptive terms of conservatives such as “Religious Right.” This is a negative term from the MSM, implying that to be both “Religious” and “Right” is bad. The MSM never use the term “Secular Left,” which is the exact reciprocal equivalent to Religious Right. Instead, to the MSM, there is “normal,” and there is the Religious Right.

Another example: The liberal MSM use the adjective “Conservative” or “Right Wing” to imply something negative or bad about a person. Rush Limbaugh is always referred to by the liberal MSM as “Right Winger” Rush Limbaugh or “Ultra-Conservative” Rush Limbaugh.

But…..his equivalent on the liberal Left is never described in such terms. Rosie O’Donnell or Michael Moore or Oprah Winfrey are never described by the MSM as “Ultra Left-Winger Michael Moore” or “Extreme Radical Liberal Rosie O’Donnell.” Never.

It’s insidious and very subtle. It’s like a drip, drip, drip on a rock. After many years, the rock is split and it wasn’t obvious it was even happening.

Conservatives need to recognize this and plan their media strategy accordingly. Because the liberal MSM will always be playing the same old tune.

Comments