It was almost funny hearing National Public Radio’s feature this late afternoon decrying “fake news.” It was on their afternoon/evening fake news program called “All Things Considered.”
NPR whining about “fake news” is the same as Shaquille O’Neal whining about tall people.
It’s funny because, you see, we’ve been cataloguing NPR’s fake news for a very long time. Hundreds of examples of National Public Radio’s engaging in actual, genuine, authentic, very real … Fake News.(1)
In fact, we’ve been producing such exposés for a whole lot longer than it’s been cool to use the term, “fake news.” You can search the phrase “NPR Watch” on this site to confirm that what I say is true. (link) Or, search “fake news” on this site as well. (link)
What is fake news? Simple: a story presented as “news” that’s intended to deceive. In this way, actual facts can be “fake news” too.
For example: “Millions of people around the country and the world are deeply frightened about the prospects of a Trump Presidency.” That’s an indisputably true fact. Here’s another indisputably true fact: “Millions of people around the country and the world are elated and excited about the prospects of a Trump Presidency.”
To present the first fact without the second is to present — you got it — fake news. This should not be controversial. The presentations of the major news media are stuffed to the gills with instances of presenting the first fact without the second. And NPR, which can be counted on — one hundred percent of the time — to present the first fact without the second, is all worried about “fake news?” I don’t think so.
Furthermore, NPR has been getting away with it for so long, that it’s entirely possible they think they’ll never get caught at it. However, they do know it when they overtly, and obviously, leave out the counter-balancing facts that provide real challenges to their premises. So, yes, they really do know they’re presenting fake news.
Not only that: if they simply ignore the counter-balancing arguments, they don’t need to go into any greater depth to justify their premise. As a result, the evening news on any of the major media is as shallow and vapid and … devoid of any real, useful information, as it can be. If, however, they were forced to find something much deeper than their first fact, then they might find themselves forced to put out an actual quality product. They aren’t, so they don’t.
Another example of fake news: The Trump administration announces a travel ban affecting visitors to this country from seven terrorism-prone countries. Immediately the major media label it a “muslim ban.” There’s extremely credible evidence, however, indicating that the ban has nothing to do with muslims(2). To wit: 85% of muslims in the world are completely unaffected by the ban. Fact. Yet, the major news media continue to refer to the executive order as a “muslim ban.” Unanimously. Sorry: That’s fake news. News delivered with the intent to deceive. Anyone with the tiniest modicum of information — which presumably, the news media have — would know that the term “muslim ban,” or “muslim travel ban,” is nothing more than opinion dressed up as news.
Argue the merits of the travel ban, or even what to call it, all you want, but it is hardly settled “news” or a “fact” that it’s a “muslim ban.” Any news story labeling as “news,” something which is not news, but rather opinion, is by definition, fake news. Again, there should be nothing controversial in this.
When Donald Trump labeled the product of the major media “fake news,” he was absolutely right, and we have been proclaiming that from these pages for a very long time.
Remember the “news” is stuffed to overflowing with just those two types of fake news. As well as others. For example: presenting opinions as news. We’ve covered a lot of that in our NPR Watch feature too.
Look, as anyone who reads this blog knows, we’re not admirers of Trump here. However, we’re honest observers of the world around us. And when we opine on the events and happenings of the day, we do so honestly. This is manifestly not true of the major news media.
The very existence of fake news is the fault of the left-wing media as well. First off, let’s be crystal clear about something: the major media even admit that they’re purveyors of fake news. To pretend that something called “journalist objectivity” is even possible is to admit that they’ve been feeding us fake news forever. If the very bedrock premise of your industry — “journalistic objectivity” — is transparently fiction, then what on earth could we believe from the major media.
And again, as in our previous piece (here), there’s a simple solution… if, that is, the major media were actually interested in getting rid of fake news (which they’re not(3)): Implement actual diversity in America’s newsrooms; diversity of thought. The only diversity actually worth having. Also, as mentioned in our previous piece, instead of being drearily predictable, instantly their broadcasts and their publications would be miles more interesting.
Not only that, but the presence of people who think differently from the major media would say out in the open: Your first fact is true, but its relevance or importance is completely annihilated by this other fact. That obvious fact, that the media would be unwilling, or unable, to see would actually prevent them from going on the air with a stupid feature that is nothing more than … fake news. Their input, the input of genuine dissenting voices in the newsroom, would inevitably improve the product of that newsroom.
However, the major media are not, as mentioned above, interested in the slightest in getting rid of fake news; they’ve been making their living at it for far too long.
Here’s a final fact: I can tell you from long personal experience, that if NPR were to eliminate fake news from their morning and afternoon “news” broadcasts, they’d lose 90% of the show. They likely would have no clue as to how to fill the rest of the time.
(1) Sorry… I liked the turn of phrase: Real, authentic, etc. fake news. 🙂
(2) No such ban can ever be completely devoid of some kind of element of “dealing with muslims.” The fact that the vast majority of all terrorism committed around the world in the past generation has been committed by muslims, means that it can’t be avoided. Nor would any rational system or country demand that it be avoided. Look, it has to be faced: if muslims won’t police themselves and their co-religionists, then someone is going to have to do it for them… before it’s too late. The much too large, ugly, child-molesting, beheading, burning alive, crucifying element of islam has been allowed free rein for way, way, way too long already. Someone needs to tell muslims to squash the radical scum in their midst, or get out of the way while real men do the job.
(3) Because to control the news is to wield real power. Therefore to give up control of the “news” is to give up power. The left doesn’t do that.