The media IS slanted; so deal with it
Michelle Malkin features two items illustrating yet again the slanted nature of the "mainstream media" in the U.S.
One is "Open Borders Consequences, continued," wherein she examines the untold story of how illegal immigration is hurting our country, and quotes John Andrews of the Rocky Mountain News who wonders "Whatever happened to investigative journalism?" He asks reasonable, important questions the kind of which we have been wondering about too (and not just pertaining to illegal immigration):
What percentage of arrests for DUI offenses in 2005 were illegal aliens? Recall that Justin Goodman of Thornton was killed in 2004 on his motorcycle by an illegal alien driver who had six prior DUI and other driving violations in Boulder and Adams counties. The man had never been referred to ICE for deportation.
Does the Denver city attorney's standing policy of not asking questions in court about the legitimacy of Mexican driver's licenses presented by defendants have any consequences for the law-abiding citizens of Denver? Recall that the man who killed police officer Donnie Young had used an invalid Mexican driver's license to avoid jail in Denver municipal court only three weeks before the slaying.
Why is it that a full year after the Colorado attorney general stated that one- quarter of Colorado's outstanding fugitive homicide warrants are for people who have fled to Mexico, no newspaper has asked how many of the individuals named in the warrants were illegal aliens with prior arrests? (In Los Angeles County, there are more than 400 such fugitive warrants.)
How are sanctuary cities like Durango, Boulder and Denver responding to SB 90, the new state law passed in 2006 to outlaw sanctuary cities? What is ICE doing to respond to SB 90?
If Denver received federal reimbursement for the incarceration of more than 1,100 illegal aliens in 2004, why were only 175 deported when they finished their terms? What subsequent crimes did the other 925 criminal aliens commit?
So many of us have been asking, where ARE the investigative reporters? Why is no one doing this job? Is nobody being educated in journalism school anymore? Certainly good, fair, thorough journalists are no longer seemingly employed en masse at the nation's newspapers, where declining circulation numbers reveal a disappointed, turned-off readership. Journalists as a whole are no longer doing their traditional jobs. They are, as a group, as John Andrews calls them, "lazy journalistic watchdogs"--
Think of how newspapers cover every other major policy issue--the war, abortion, health care, homeland security, racial discrimination, you name it. They have no problem taking one "anecdote" and using it to illustrate what they see as systemic failures. They have no problem sensationalizing individual cases of "undocumented workers" and their families. But point out a crime victim of an illegal alien? All of sudden, the journalism-by-anecdote school can't accept such "emotional" and "ideological" story-telling.
The second item, "Garbage in, Garbage out," describes how editors at two major U.S. magazines reworded a Middle East photographer's photo caption to reflect an anti-Israel stance:
His photograph, published by both US News and World Report and Time Magazine, had a caption describing the scene as the wreckage of an Israeli jet shot down by Hizballah. In this post, Stevens reveals that the captions he sent in with his pictures described the scene accurately—but editors at the magazines changed the captions to completely alter the story.
Meanwhile, James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal's Best of the Web also highlights how the Associated Press slants its news coverage to the point of lying by omission:
AP: We Have No Honesty
The Associated Press reports on a new legal filing in a case involving America's terrorist enemies:The Bush administration said Monday that Guantanamo Bay prisoners have no right to challenge their detentions in civilian courts and that lawsuits by hundreds of detainees should be dismissed. . . .
"Congress could have simply withdrawn jurisdiction over these matters and left the decision of whether to detain enemy aliens held abroad to the military," the Justice Department wrote.
Instead, Congress set up a military commission structure establishing "unprecedented" levels of review for detainees, the attorneys wrote.
So according to the story, the administration is arguing that while the detainees don't have the right to file civil lawsuits, they do have procedural protections if tried before military commissions. In addition--although the AP does not mention this--all detainees receive an "Article 5" hearing to review their designation as enemy combatants, and each year they go before an Administrative Review Board, the equivalent of a parole hearing, to determine if they can be released without threatening U.S. security.
All these procedural protections notwithstanding, the AP headlines its story "Administration: Detainees Have No Rights."
All right, folks, it's a new world out there. Bloggers, conservatives, and the right in general now know a few things about the world that we didn't know before 9/11--besides the fact that we're in a war and Islamic jihadis are trying to kill us. One is that France is not our friend or ally. Another is that the United Nations is a corrupt sinkhole not to be counted on for anything. Another is that our nation's borders are wide open to massive illegal immigration and at this point, five years after 9/11, still show no serious hope of ever being secured by the Federal government. And another fact about the post-9/11 world that we now recognize is that the vast majority of the mainstream media, both in the U.S. and around the world, is hopelessly and irrefutably slanted toward the left, and would seem to habitually incorporate more than a soupçon of anti-American (and anti-Israeli) bias.
The time to lament, be outraged, and point fingers is ending. The time to accept these facts as true, incorporate them into our lives, and move on, is upon us.
Any plan or policy made by individual or groups of conservatives in their private or public lives from here on forward should take these facts in account as givens.
Accept the truth and move on.
Don't subscribe to or support biased, poorly edited newspapers or magazines. Don't expect a fair shake from the media (or from France, or from the U.N.).
Plan accordingly. Deal with it. Deal around it.
Use some of that famous Yankee knowhow and free-market ingenuity and be creative.
On the other hand, it never hurts to keep saying the obvious for the benefit of the new generation of kids coming up.