Commentary

The Dishonest Media

There is a very popular book out called Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distorts the News, that for the most part describes how the media definitely puts a liberal slant on most of the news. This is due to the fact that the media is composed for the most part of very liberal reporters with non-religious backgrounds, proven by various studies that tabulated the religious habits of reporters in general. As I remember, over 80 percent of the members of the media do not practice any religious faith. They also tend to lean very much to the left, are politically correct, and tolerant beyond reason of a person’s right to immoral behavior. When confronted with their bias, they don’t see a problem since everyone they associate with thinks and talks the same way they think and talk. They believe they are ‘middle of the road’ Americans. Unfortunately, the average American reads, hears, and sees this bias so much they begin to believe it is the middle of the road.

My eyes were opened to this bias at a very early age back in the late 1940s. I lived in St. Paul, Minnesota whose twin city is Minneapolis. Both cities had daily newspapers. At a young age, I thought that newspapers reported the news as it happened, until one day The St. Paul Dispatch printed a picture of several important people standing around the President of the United States as he signed a very significant bill. These senators and others were being recognized for their effort in getting the bill passed through Congress. The Minneapolis Tribune had the same picture and AP Story; however there was a slight alteration. The right hand side of the picture had been cropped to eliminate one person. That person was an ex governor of Minnesota with whom the Tribune editors did not share the same viewpoints.

The Tribune has not changed over the years. It still holds back information. A recent example: they still refuse to publish information on the relationship between abortion and breast cancer. They are not the only newspaper or media outlet that hides the negative effects of abortion. They are so pro-abortion they will not print the truth even though it is presented to them in numerous reports. Studies by international expert and endocrinologist Joel Brind, PhD indicate that 5% of all breast cancer cases are caused by abortion. Since there are 260,000 cases of breast cancer each year, this means that 13,000 of the cancers are abortion-related. Shortly before Roe versus Wade, which legalized abortion, one in every 12 women developed breast cancer. Today, the numbers are one in every 8 women. This serious problem deserves honest reporting.

Recently the March for Life in January which drew 100,000 participants, numerous congressmen, prelates, and pro-life leaders to Washington DC was virtually ignored by the media. In the coverage of the same event in 2003, the TV networks ABC, CBS and NBC distorted the news so badly that many people thought it was a pro-abortion demonstration. In fact, CBS’s Dan Rather said about the same march; “Tens of thousands of demonstrators on both sides of the issue filled the streets of Washington DC.” This was an outright lie as the pro-abortion demonstrators did not exceed even a hundred and these few were only near the Supreme Court Building at the end of the march.

Another more recent example is the “coverage” of the movie “The Passion of the Christ.” It was so obviously biased that it even became laughable. The charge of the movie being anti-Jewish was discredited when a leading Jewish organization did a survey and found out people who blamed the Jews for the death of Jesus were less inclined to think so after viewing the film. The news media had people so whipped up over this issue that one city had police in the lobby of the movie theatre as if the moviegoers were going to rush out and assault the first Jewish person they met. The interviews of Mel Gibson were more like criminal interrogations than interviews, even eliciting misguided comments from his 87 year old father. Does anyone recall interviews of the producer of “The Last Temptation of Christ?” No, because this movie is what the members of the Hollywood media wished to see. It was anti-Jesus. Next came the charge that the movie was too violent which was answered with; “It was less violent than the actual crucifixion.” Finally, in desperation, the media complained that Mel Gibson was making too much money and no one should make money on Jesus. What a group of hypocrites!

Speaking of making money, the movie industry is so intent on producing films that are in their own nihilist lifestyle that they cannot stop. They have such an entrenched mindset that there is no way they will produce a film that supports moral or biblical viewpoints. The G and PG rated films continually gross two or three times what an R rated film will gross. Yet they demonstrate their own perversion by continually producing films depicting violence, foul language, graphic sexual content, and nudity.

A frequent ploy of Television ‘Personalities’ such as Dan Rather is to interview those selected few who have the same prejudices as their own. As an example, they will often interview a known dissident priest or the leader of an anti-Catholic group such as ‘Catholics for a Free Choice’ as an authoritative spokesperson for the Catholic Church. Peter Jennings of ABC, when he was covering the funeral of Mother Teresa, even went so far as to interview someone (probably the only person in the world) who hated Mother Teresa. They slant the news according to their own ideologies and search for sources that will back them up.

Another ploy of the “news reporters” is to use euphemisms to change the meaning of a story or event. This is most evident in stories on abortion. Abortion is always referred to as ‘choice’ or ‘reproductive rights’. A pro-life person is always called anti-abortion. This became quite a problem to them when they had to report about the pro-lifers trying to save Terry Shiavo from being killed by her husband as anti-abortion demonstrators. I don’t know what starvation of someone had to do with the abortion issue, but they could not say the words ‘pro-life’. Of course, illustrations (even from medical books) of an abortion are never shown on TV. It is interesting to note that a British television station actually did a documentary on abortion showing the aborted fetus. I doubt if the pro-abortion media in this country will ever do this.

Even news channels like Fox News which is supposed to get it right are just as biased. Very recently during the 9/11 commission ‘investigation’ John Ashcroft explained that the FBI wasn't even told hijackers Almihdhar and Alhazmi were in the country until weeks before the 9/11 attack – because of Justice Department guidelines put into place in 1995. And then they were not allowed to put al-Qaida specialists on the hunt for them because of these same guidelines. He next announced that the person who built that wall described in the infamous 1995 memo "is a member of the 9/11 commission." (This was Jamie Gorelick for those who did not watch the proceedings.) Now did she resign from the commission? No! She remains there to be part of the organization that is investigating the results of her actions. So what did the news report? They were putting their own spin on events. No mention of the damning Gorelick memo.

What can you do? Be selective of your sources of news coverage and carefully evaluate what you hear and see. If they are covering Catholic issues, do they use the same old set of ‘experts’ that are dissident priests, ex-priests, and feminists such as Rev. McBrien and Francis Kissling? Take it all with a large dose of salt and, more importantly, inform your friends about what is really happening behind the ‘news’.

 

 

Return to Top

Close this window to return to current Commentary Page.