Misleading Press

Via Bitter, we discover this piece of…um…reportage…regarding Lobby day. Bitter’s post focused on the anger of the anti-gun attendees which I commented upon in my original post; however, something different in the article caught my eye:

Hundreds of advocates flooded the state Capitol on Monday to urge the Virginia General Assembly to enact reforms on such issues as the environment, immigration and gun control.

Gun-control advocates, including survivors of the April 16 shooting rampage that took the lives of 32 victims at Virginia Tech, poured into a Senate committee meeting to support a bill that would require background checks for all gun-show sales. They then staged a “lie-in,” lying on their backs outside the Capitol to draw attention to gun deaths in Virginia last year.

Many gun-rights activists also showed up at the committee meeting — some wearing guns — and came in force to watch the protest.

Notice the carefully crafted use of terms designed to give a visual of “hundreds” of anti-gun protesters “pouring” into the capital. And then the weak mention of “many gun-rights activists.”

One is left with the distinct impression that the gun rights activists were in the minority.

This is prima facia evidence of the bias of the media in reporting. This piece was carefully crafted to paint a misleading picture. They didn’t report anything factually inaccurate. In their account of “hundreds” they lumped the gun-control proponents together with environmentalists and other activists to maintain technical accuracy. No, it wasn’t an outright lie, but this is a prime example of “spin.” Carefully selecting phrases to paint a misleading or inaccurate picture.

Gun rights supporters outnumbered the anti-gun forces by AT LEAST two to one. Not only that, but the anti-gun groups freely admitted that they were actively busing people in from all over the state to bolster their numbers. Every gun rights activist that was there got there on their own motivation, on their own dime and of their own volition.

Media bias? What media bias?

Update: Something else just occurred to me. The report said “Many gun rights activists…some wearing guns…”

I think what they meant was “some VISIBLY wearing guns.” I hate to break the news to them but I’d guess MOST of us were wearing guns…just because you don’t see them doesn’t mean they aren’t there. Furthermore, that basic truth isn’t restricted only to law abiding citizens. Just because you don’t SEE people carrying guns every day…including the thugs around your ‘hood…doesn’t mean that no one is armed.

This is a poignant reminder of the basic fallacy of anti-gun thinking (or lack-thereof). In the make-believe world of the sheeple, as long as they don’t have to see it, it doesn’t exist.

Than, as in the UK right now, they express wonderment and disbelief that their wishful denial of truth didn’t result in the utopia they had envisioned.

Followed shortly by the calls to wish some more…only HARDER this time.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.