How Firearm Incidents are Reported by The Media


PDA






Newton
July 4, 2003, 06:48 PM
On this weeks local news, a Baltimore resident was shown being arrested on firearms charges - allegedly, he had been illegally manufacturing rifles in the basement of his row home.

The commentary ran something like this :

"Police arrested a male Baltimore resident today on suspicion of committing several firearms related offences, including the illegal manufacture of rifles. Police seized large amounts of highly explosive ammunition components, an official stated that there was sufficient material to blow up the entire neighborhood. Police also removed ammunition making equipment and several bags of firearms components. Local residents were said to be shocked that such a thing could happen in their neighborhood. A police official was quoted as saying that the arrested individual was also suspected of having links to White Supremacist groups"

Is it me, or is there a "tone" present in all these reports.

Newton

If you enjoyed reading about "How Firearm Incidents are Reported by The Media" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
BowStreetRunner
July 4, 2003, 06:59 PM
ill betcha the media prob'ly thinks everyone on The High Road is a redneck anti govt white supremacist
that is if they knew we existed
the media has to make it sound sensational....and if the truth suffers...so e it......(to them)
besides.....anyone who would make a gun MUST be a white supremacist redneck anyway...i mean, who needs a gun
BSR

P95Carry
July 4, 2003, 07:13 PM
Everything seems so geared these days towards ''anti'' that not only does accuracy suffer, so does truth. It would appear that max shock value is the usual goal ... by use of buzz words such as ''high power'', high explosive'', assault'', arsenal, illegal, large amounts, people shocked, and many more.

For the most part these terms are used in an exaggerative manner or even totally inaccurately ...... the quest for the latter being all but non-existent ...... sensationalism being the prime objective.

It is sad indeed as well as angering, to see the bias so blatently shown ...... when with a small injection even of some balance, there are probably many people out there who might just ask a few more questions and also get a more balanced perspective on firearms ownership as a whole.

12 Volt Man
July 4, 2003, 07:46 PM
It seems like before the real story comes out, it was always an "AK-47 Automatic Assault Rifle". Then we find out it was some guys shotgun.

Skunkabilly
July 4, 2003, 07:46 PM
including the illegal manufacture of rifles

Gotta give 'em credit, at least they weren't high-powered assault rifles. :banghead:

Jay Bakerr
July 4, 2003, 09:22 PM
If you don't understand anything else, understand this: The media, meaning teeeeveee, newspapers, movies, magazines, are all owned and controlled by the Marxist Socialists. They seek one thing and one thing only, the total destruction of the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, individual Rights, Freedom and Liberty, and the institution of their Great, Brave New Marxist Socialist Police State Utopia.

Therefore, all guns have to go. Demonization of all gunowners, turning them/us into "vermin" means we can someday -- soon, they hope -- be "exterminated." Afterall, isn't that what we do with "filthy vermin"???

It's really just that simple, and their Grand Plan has been being put into place for the past 90 years.

J.B.

Waitone
July 4, 2003, 09:33 PM
including the illegal manufacture of riflesand Police seized large amounts of highly explosive ammunition components, an official stated that there was sufficient material to blow up the entire neighborhood. and Police also removed ammunition making equipment and several bags of firearms components. and A police official was quoted as saying that the arrested individual was also suspected of having links to White Supremacist groups" Reads to me like semi-keestered journalism. Serial assertions bordering on hearsay.

Please follow the story and post when details are develop.

Newton
July 4, 2003, 09:57 PM
Found a link:

http://www.digitalcity.com/baltimore/news/article.adp?article=1326590

Newton

Standing Wolf
July 4, 2003, 10:03 PM
Is it me, or is there a "tone" present in all these reports.

Nope, it's not you. That's plain old-fashioned anti-Second Amendment bigotry in action.

Combat-wombat
July 5, 2003, 05:14 AM
Highly explosive ammunition components? Do they mean blackpowder and reloading equipment?

NewsShooter
July 5, 2003, 09:56 AM
Therefore, all guns have to go. Demonization of all gunowners, turning them/us into "vermin" means we can someday -- soon, they hope -- be "exterminated." Afterall, isn't that what we do with "filthy vermin"???


:banghead: Mr Bakerr,
You sound like you have been listening to the short wave again.
My question to you is: what militia group are you a member of and where do you people come up with this crap???:cuss:

Politically Incorrect
July 5, 2003, 01:55 PM
I work for a tv news station. And it's not so much anti-Second Amendment, but as was pointed out, it is sensational. TV News looks for drama in a story.

Just as the old saying goes, "If it bleeds, it leads."

clem
July 5, 2003, 02:28 PM
"Police seized large amounts of highly explosive ammunition components, an official stated that there was sufficient material to blow up the entire neighborhood."


Wow! There must of been a tractor trailer load of black powder in the residence. :D

Justin
July 5, 2003, 04:52 PM
If you don't understand anything else, understand this: The media, meaning teeeeveee, newspapers, movies, magazines, are all owned and controlled by the Marxist Socialists. They seek one thing and one thing only, the total destruction of the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, individual Rights, Freedom and Liberty, and the institution of their Great, Brave New Marxist Socialist Police State Utopia.http://burns.thefinaldimension.org/contrib/blackeye/hihi.gif

I work in television. I have yet to find a copy of the 'Evil Marxist Overlord's Guide to Dominating the USA Through the Media' laying on the program director's desk. News reporters and producers are critical of guns and gun owners for one very simple reason: ignorance. They simply don't know any better. As such, I have a couple of reporters who I consider friends and they have all expressed surprise at my owning of guns. As one friend put it, "You're normal, all of the gunowners I've met have all been freaky."

Guess what?

Posting ignorant drivel about Marxist conspiracy theories on the internet is one of the things that causes reporters and others to look at the gun culture and think we're a bunch of back-woods idjits who are still waiting for the Y2K bug to kick in.

I'm sick and tired of having to explain that the conspiracy nuts and morons whose tin-foil beanie is obviously on so tight that it's constricting blood flow to their brains are not representative of the typical American gun owner.

:fire:

Waitone
July 5, 2003, 05:45 PM
I must agree there is ignorance in the media about guns, the gun culture, and civil rights associated with the Second Amendment. I also agree those who wear tin foil hats do the movement no good.

That said, every movement has its extremes. Every facet of life has it extremes. It is in my view the job of the media to ignore the extremes yet that seems to be where it gravitates. "If it bleeds, it leads." There is a station here in my city that broadcasts nothing but blood, fire, and gore. And that is called responsible journalism.

Another factor which must be addressed is the phenonomon of deliberately imposed ignorance. Caused by what? How 'bout editorial policy which mandate nothing positive about firearms ever makes it to the air? How 'bout "journalists" who literally fear the NRA AND WILL NOT PICK UP THE FREAKIN' PHONE and get a comment. Or how 'bout the "journalist" who feels it acceptable to go to an anti-gun group to get the NRA's position on an issue. Or how 'bout the "journalist" who writes a piece (and passes muster with the editor) chocked full of factually incorrect statements, yet it gets passed as fact. Or how 'bout (my personal favorite) the reportage of a shooting that deliberately omits any reference to the use of firearms in the stopping of it.

Yep, you're correct when you chastise the tin foil hat brigade. But is seems to me "journalism" needs to clean it own skirts.

jdkelly
July 5, 2003, 05:48 PM
Justin,

Like you, I believe most news stories, that are reported incorrectly, are done so out of ignorance on the subject matter. But I also believe that the need to increase viewer ship, personal bias and the lack of time to accurately report the "facts" are also contributing factors. Errors reported in the news, that boost ratings, are unlikely to be corrected.

That’s how an apartment that home made fireworks were produced in, becomes a “BOMB FACTORY”. That’s how a rifle that shoots 22lr becomes a “SNIPER WEAPON”. That’s how a rifle that shoots a round too weak to be used as a deer cartridge in most states can be labeled a “HIGH POWERED” rifle. That’s how a collection of old bolt action rifles can be come a “Military Weapons Cache”. That’s how a shotgun with a twenty-eight inch barrel and pistol stock becomes a sawed off shotgun.

It’s the fact that the information is incorrect, misleading, and damaging to we gun people, while benefiting those that are lying (and lack of intrest in reporting accurate facts is lying), which feed the “conspiracy nuts”.

If your friends are biased enough to think all gun people are not normal, what makes you think the gun people will trust your friends (and their friends), when they are so often wrong in a damaging way?

Respectfully,

jdkelly

Hkmp5sd
July 5, 2003, 06:07 PM
I don't work in television or any other media outlet, but I do believe there is a concerted effort by some in the media to use the "news" in an effort to influence the viewpoint of the average citizen.

By having no first hand knowledge, I'm limited in gaining information from books. Of those, the most recent ones I believe to be truthful and accurate are...

Off With Their Heads: Traitors, Crooks & Obstructionists in American Politics, Media and Business by Dick Morris.

The Death of Right and Wrong: Exposing the Left's Assault on Our Culture and Values by Tammy Bruce.

Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right by Ann Coulter.

Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism by Ann Coulter

BIAS: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News by Bernard Goldberg.

To head off any accusations I only read one side of the issue, I have also read the most recent additions to modern fantasy fiction...

Living History by Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The Clinton Wars by Sidney Blumenthal.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix by J.K. Rowling.

Jay Bakerr
July 5, 2003, 08:52 PM
NewsShooter, you advertise your supreme stupidity with that diatribe against me. We're ALL in the militia, which proves you've never bothered to read the Second Amendment, or, if you have, you are totally incapable of comprehending it. Nor, do you know the definition of "militia," other than what your left wing masters in the media have defined for you.

Groups?? I belong to none, other than the NRA... and having been a member of that "militia group" since 1951, have seen the deliberate demonization of gun owners, by the media, over a long period of time.

This was accelerated in late 1963, after President Kennedy was assassinated, and has been increasing at an increasing rate, ever since. Even then, the media began a feeding frenzy against "gunowners", blaming us for Kennedy's death. Where do I come up with "this stuff?" You ignorant bliss ninny. I've not only watched it happen for 40 years, I've studied Marx and Lenin (and I don't mean "Groucho" & "John"), and know how the Marxist doctrine is used to manipulate people. The brainwashing propaganda comes from the media, and the education system, mainly.

(After the Berlin Wall came down, and many were crying "Communism is Dead, hoorah!" the L.A. Times (better known as Pravda West), interviewed a Stanford Professor of Sociology (what else?), who stated that he was a card carrying member of the Communist Party, along with another 10,000 U.S. professors at universites and colleges, and that the Soviets didn't do it right. When the American Communists finally took over, they'd "do it right", in the U.S.)

As for shortwave, I haven't played around with that since I was in the U.S. Army, and that was a loooongg time ago. I like the "oldies-but-goldies" on AM. Should I get a SW?? You probably know which ones are best.

I find it interesting that you, and your soulmate in ignorance, Justin, have no comprehension how this orchestrated demonization has taken place. Today, most Marxist Socialist inspired people call themselves "progressives" (a word straight from V.I. Lenin, one he (and Stalin) used to describe those in accordance with his and his good buddy, Karl's, doctrine. One of the tactics of international communist progression, was to eventually control the media.

You oughta take some time off from fawning over the New York Times, L.A. Times, and their ilk, and listening to the blather of that admitted Progressive Socialist Democrat Walter Cronkite (and his little anchor sycophants on the networks) who stated in a long feature piece in the L.A. Times, if he were President, he'd institute a Communist Government and use the U.S. Military to confiscate every gun in the U.S. Then read Marx, Lenin, and Mao. Might give you more than just a usual education.

Just for cheets & grins, you two denialists might also read, among other things, "The Sword and The Shield, The Mitrokhin Archive And The Secret History Of The KGB, by Christorpher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin." Yeah, yeah, I know, he was just another tin hat conspiracy freak... except, Mitrokhin was a KGB Colonel for many years, and was as inside the communist movement as one can get, and details the infiltration of the American media by the Marxists. Or, read the book, "Radical Son," by David Horowitz, a former communist radical, son of American Communists. Read James Bovard's "Lost Rights." Or, "Treason," and "Slander" by Ann Coulter. Or any number of books that have been written about the takeover of the media by the American "progressives."

But, I know you won't. Ignorance is bliss, so you'lll just meander along, thinking the only reason your "good buddies" in the media continue with their "verminization" of YOU, as gunowners, is that they're just not well informed enough about firearms, for if they were, they would not lie consisitently about them and honest gunowners. Their brainwashing propaganda is there for a purpose, although you're too enamoured with your own "tight knit community of media members" to admit it.

And, as for you, Justin, being "in the teeeveee medium," and therefore ohhh sooo well informed... if you wanna meet some real, heavy duty communists "in the media", I could introduce you to quite a few I know in Hollywood. You see, you smug little "medium member," I've been in the teeeeveee/movie racket for PROBABLY, more years than you and NewsShooter put together. (Try since 1963.)

So, if you two naive, foolish, arrogant, holier-than-thou know-nothings wanna keep up with your juvenile insults, just include me in -- to paraphrase Sam Goldwyn. I'll come along for the ride.

J.B.

gbelleh
July 5, 2003, 09:20 PM
Wow!




I've noticed something about perceptions of the media...

For every person I hear complaining about the liberal media and their socialist agenda, etc. I've heard an equal number of liberals complaining about the conservative media run by right wing, evil Republican corporations skewing the news to make Bush look like a saint and going out of their way to demonize the Clintons or any other Democrat.

ACP
July 5, 2003, 09:26 PM
Jay Bakerr -- I'm an associate editor at a mid-sized newpaper in a mid-sized state. So there goes your argument.

I find most reporters -- even ones that are intelligent otherwise - are completely stupid when it comes to guns. I believe most reporters have a liberal or slightly left-of-center bias on sopcial issues, and that any interest in guns has been relegated to that small, dark corner in their minds set aside for other "bad" things.

I just complained to an associate Thursday evening about an Associated Press report in which the reporter described the capture of some high-powered (there's that word again) rifles in a city apartment -- "powerful enough to shoot through a wall," the reporter wrote. Of course, hammers can go through walls, as can the occaisional fist.

And re: the media wanting to take over the world... I'll be happy to talk about this at length on this forum, but not tonight, as it's bedtime for my infant daughter. But let me just say that most "media" outlets are owned by corporations that seek one thing: more money. And it doesn't make any difference if it's reality shows or game shows or soap operas or conservative talk shows or violent police dramas -- if there's an audience and it will make a buck, so be it. And the line between news and adversiting is all but gone.

That does not, IMHO, represent some liberal/socialist/call it what you will agenda to rule the world. If it was, how do you explain Fox, the Wall Street Journal, Rush Limbaugh, etc. etc.?

Hkmp5sd
July 5, 2003, 10:15 PM
If it was, how do you explain Fox, the Wall Street Journal, Rush Limbaugh, etc. etc.?

That's easy. The Internet and Cable TV.

This removed the lock that ABC/NBC/CBS and the New York Times had on what news and how the news was presented to the American public.

If proof is needed, look at the recent war in Iraq. There were 600 embedded reporters among the troops reporting live from the front lines. The liberal media didn't like that.

An article in the New York Times reported "concerns have led some in television to question whether all the access was ultimately in the best interests of war journalism."

Jeff Greenfield of CNN stated, "These real-time images of combat are indeed compelling. The hard question is, do they inform us or unintentionally mislead us?"

An op-ed in the New York Times went so far as to claim the embedded reporters were actually the administration's way of manipulating the news media.

What was it they didn't want us to see?

Justin
July 5, 2003, 10:30 PM
Ok, first off, at no point did I deny that the dominant media/news sources lean to the left. What I find patently offensive is the assertation that there is some sort of hierarchical conspiracy to take over the media and make it the mouthpiece of socialists. Sorry, but that's just a little too 'Pod People' for me.

...I've studied Marx and Lenin (and I don't mean "Groucho" & "John"), and know how the Marxist doctrine is used to manipulate people. Yeah? So have I. Your point being?

I find it interesting that you, and your soulmate in ignorance, Justin, have no comprehension how this orchestrated demonization has taken place. No. All I'm asking for is verifiable proof that there is an overarching hierarchy of Marxists and socialists trying to take over the media through some sort of nefarious conspiracy. I don't have time for hearsay and conjecture.
Today, most Marxist Socialist inspired people call themselves "progressives" Yeah, and? I long ago made the mental connection between a person calling themselves a 'progressive' and their ravingly socialistic leanings.

You oughta take some time off from fawning over the New York Times, L.A. Times, and their ilk, and listening to the blather of that admitted Progressive Socialist Democrat Walter Cronkite (and his little anchor sycophants on the networks) *Yawn* So are you just going to sit there and make hints, or do you actually have the wherewithall to come right out and try to call me a commie? C'mon, I dare ya's.

Just for cheets & grins, you two denialists might also read, among other things, "The Sword and The Shield, The Mitrokhin Archive And The Secret History Of The KGB, by Christorpher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin I'm familiar with the book, and with some of the information contained therein. I've not had a chance to read it yet, though based on my impressions, it's a truthful look at what the Russians were up to during the Cold War, up to and including buried KGB weapons caches in the continental US. But then, the Russian system fell to the triumph of capitalism, as did, I would assume, their attempts to infiltrate the US media.
But, I know you won't. Ignorance is bliss, so you'lll just meander along, thinking the only reason your "good buddies" in the media continue with their "verminization" of YOU, as gunowners, is that they're just not well informed enough about firearms, for if they were, they would not lie consisitently about them and honest gunowners. Their brainwashing propaganda is there for a purpose, although you're too enamoured with your own "tight knit community of media members" to admit it. Tell you what, how about we make a little wager. I'll go and ask the various reporters, producers, photogs, etc. that I work with. If any of them are card-carrying members of the American Communist Party, or YS, or whatever, I will bow to your superior wisdom.

So, if you two naive, foolish, arrogant, holier-than-thou know-nothings wanna keep up with your juvenile insults, There's the pot calling the kettle black...

Justin
July 5, 2003, 10:34 PM
If it was, how do you explain Fox, the Wall Street Journal, Rush Limbaugh, etc. etc.? Nothing more than a triumph of the free market. When people got fed up with the mainstream media, there were those who decided to start media outlets with a different point of view. Even if the Reds had invaded every single media outlet in the country, they would be continually fighting a losing battle by trying to infiltrate those media outlets that sprang up to present an opposing point of view.

tatters
July 6, 2003, 02:49 AM
I agree, it's the dollars. If right now it's a money-maker to have a conservative talk radio show, you can bet ur bootie that's where any media corporation will put their efforts. Here's how I see it:

If I got into a car wreck at pretty much any given time, and there was a reason for the media to be there, you can bet the first thing they would mention is that my car contained guns, and enough ammo to hold off police for a few days. If I even think I will be stopping at the range I pack a few guns and a ton of ammo. Of course there will be no mention of a carry permit, or that all these guns were bought legally, or that I haven't had so much as a traffic ticket since 1979. Or that the ammo is mostly .22 rimfire. The gun and ammo part will be enough of a sensation to make news and to turn me into some crazed killer,who God forbid, owned several guns.

I kinda liken the cable news craze to the current trend toward charter scools and the effort to receive vouchers to send your kid there.

Cable news came into the market and is kicking the crap out of network news. I believe competition begets a higher quality of the product it represents.
The public schools have their feet to the fire right now because of the threat of lower enrollment. If the voucher program ever goes through, some public schools will be screwed.

Maybe not a great comparison, but it's how I perceive it.

saddenedcitizen
July 6, 2003, 11:39 AM
OK, got my nomex suit/boots/hood on so flame away.

Yep, a LOT of is is ignorance on the part of the 'reporters' 'cause 1) many are simply too da**ed lazy to dig out facts & 2) they think they already know everything.

No, there probably isn't a 'Marxists Guide to Taking Over the World' BUT the media in general gives this impression. They are like a school of fish that turn in unison. There is no single overriding guidance causing this but it sure looks that way when you watch it. (the student at a law college several months ago who was stopped by 2 or 3 gun carrying students - the fact that other armed students stopped him was only reported in 4 of several hundred newspaper articles)

Most stories are reported in the same terms (emotional/sensational) for rating/dollars. And MANY are simply factually wrong. I LOVE the ones about how a gun fired in a modern airliner will cause it to crash (Simply NOT true) BUT many people get much of their information from the 'news' and believe everything that Peter/Dan/Tom say is true and factual.

Most liberals do not like to have their ideas questioned and therefore find it easier to work in a field where this rarely happens. Ever notice how many of the liberal columnists do not give email addresses and in many cases not even the email address for the editor ? They can simply say what they feel/think whether factual or not a get away with it. (Jason Blair ring a bell - if you pick up a haystack and a needle falls out, you can bet that haystack is loaded with needles !!)

Point I'm trying to make is that many in the media believe that they know what's best for the rest of us. They seem to decide consiously or otherwise that they need enlighten we poor uneducated neanderthals and the best way to do that - Gee, I'll become a writer, news anchor, editor, publisher whatever and help the world see the light.

ACP
July 6, 2003, 02:42 PM
Not to beat a dead horse, but that WAS the liberal media embedded in Iraq.

Hkmp5sd
July 6, 2003, 02:51 PM
ACP,

For the most part, that's true. What the guys back in the newsroom didn't like was this information being provided live, directly to the population. You were seeing the combat live, with the reporters merely describing what they were actually seeing. They were not giving "commentary" or the usual talking head "interpretation" of what was going on. The broadcasters back home don't feel you are capable enough to view the video, listen to the interviews and reach a correct judgement on what was really happening. They think they should censor some of the information (it's just too far over your head for you to comprehend) and format what information is released to make it so you, with your limited intellect, can understand the truth and not what the administration's propaganda machine is putting out.

Mark Tyson
July 6, 2003, 03:00 PM
Man, this is thread got ugly.

In my opinion there is no way you can call the media generally biased towards the "left". Look at all the face time that Michael Savage and Pat Buchanan get on MSNBC. Look at the popularity of Liddy, Limbaugh and a host of others on the radio. Fox News, Washington Times, Wall Street Journal ... all are conservative media.

Conservatives think the media's too liberal. Liberals think the media's too conservative. Bias is in the eye of the beholder.

tatters
July 6, 2003, 05:36 PM
Good point,Mark.

Politically Incorrect
July 6, 2003, 06:44 PM
One story I related to before is when I was out in a live truck with a reporter from my station, I told him that a Ruger Mini-14 or Mini-30 is not an "assault rifle." We were not sure which since the police spokesman said it was a "Ruger assault rifle" and didn't mention the caliber.

He changed it to an assault-style weapon to appease me, which was easier on my ears. The reporter had talked about supporting citizens carrying concealed handguns. We talked with the news photographer about why they should allow it in Ohio since the laws do not prevent criminals from carrying concealed.

ACP
July 7, 2003, 08:21 AM
On a real thinly connected note ... reading through a recent Paladin Press catalog this weekend I noticed liberal :) use of the phrases "assault weapon" and "high powered rifle" in describing the various books they sell..

cpileri
July 7, 2003, 08:39 AM
let's subject all firearms reports, indeed all reports by the media, to:
The Bullfighter
http://www.dc.com/insights/bullfighter/news.asp
and see how much bs is filtered out!
I can't get it to run on my system, but maybe someone could screen these stories?
C-

NewsShooter
July 7, 2003, 02:09 PM
Mr Bakerr,
First of all I won't go any farther with this thread except to say that you DO NOT know what my politics are, Conservative Dem. Or what my personal experience is. Twenty three years in the media most at the network level.
US Army Vet, and proud of it. I went to Afghanistan with the 101st last year and again to the Persian Gulf this year. I own several firearms and carry 24/7.
Now as to the militia, I am very familiar with the militia movement. More than I care to be. Oh and I do own a shortwave radio too.
I won't say any more unless you continue flaming those who call you out or disagree with your points of view. I do disagree with most of if not all of your crap so far and probably will continue to do so. But I will defend your right to spew anything you wish.
I will say this about most reporters and media. NO media outlet is monolithic. They never speak with one voice. Reporters are allmost never an expert on a given subject. Thats why they sound like they are talking down to you. They are trying to not sound as uninformed as they really are.
Now, Mr Bakerrrrrrrrr if you want to continue the firefight let'er rip, I am a very very good shot.:neener:

bogie
July 7, 2003, 03:17 PM
One of the major problems that the pro-gun movement has is that the far-right-to-the-point-of-making-Mussolini-look-benevolent-loonies tend to get a LOT of press... And since they're also pro-gun, they get a lot of BAD press for us...

The militia movement got its main growth during the gun control craziness of the late eighties/early nineties - it basically didn't exist before that. Then in many cases it got co-opted by the white power folks, which resulted in the eventual destruction of ANY credibility by the time of Waco...

The average reporter doesn't have the time any more to check facts. And the average editor doesn't have the time either. And neither of 'em know jack about guns. It's up to us to write/call/whatever, and politely bitch at 'em.

NewsShooter
July 7, 2003, 03:43 PM
Bogie........
You sir, are correct.

moa
July 7, 2003, 05:24 PM
I remember a comment by Carol Simpson some years ago. She was the weekend anchor at ABC news. Her comment was to the effect that viewers wanted news reporters like her to tell them what to think about a news worthy event.

Regarding the shooting in a small university a year or two ago where two students (I think one of them was an out-of-state policeman) stopped the gunman, it is apparently true that very few news organizations that I am aware reported that the two men were armed. It amazed me that these two guys were interviewed by Diane Sawyer on ABC's Good Morning America, and absolutely nothing was mentioned of them using their guns to stop the rampage. The only part reported is that they wrestled the assailant to the ground. Incidentially the assailant's gun was empty by then. At the time, I knew nothing about the two guys having guns.

So, the only thing I can think is it may have been mentioned in the interview, but ABC edited it out. The interview I saw, and assumed live, probably was not.

And, I do believe there is a very strong anti-gun, anti-gun owner bigotry, especially in the old guard news media, I do not believe it is just an "accident". It is politically driven, no doubt. One media research group reported not too long ago that for every 11 news articles that were gun-control, anti-gun oriented, there was one anti-gun control, pro-gun oriented article. IIRC, it was Accuracy in Media.

Zedicus
July 7, 2003, 06:43 PM
Well, in the entire meager 24 Years of my life I have yet to hear/see an Unbiased News Report in the US or UK....

& from my observations, the News Shows are only intersted in Sinsationalisem and High Raitings, which 9 times out of 10 with Gun Related topics is usualy Anti-Gun with Negitive Chicken Little type garbage.
"The sky is Falling, The sky is Falling, If People are allowed to have Weapons The World Will End!":rolleyes:
(*cough*Er...& How did the USA come to be again?)

about the only thing I even Pay attention to on the news anymore is the Weather Report...(& that's Wrong at least 60% of the time)

Over here in the UK when that Psyco Shot up that School with his Handguns the Media Predictably Was on it like a Fly to Dung, Immediatly 'Promoting' the Idea of Banning Guns from Civillain Posession throughout the UK (Primaraly Handguns).

The Goverment Sadly took the bait.....:(

I'm not sure which is the more Baffleing, the fact that they actualy expected all the crooks to turn in there weaponry, or the fact that they don't seem to notice that the gun related crime rate has been skyrocketing since the ban...

Kinda Puzzling Realy.....

t-money
July 7, 2003, 06:50 PM
Zedicus said:

"And, I do believe there is a very strong anti-gun, anti-gun owner bigotry, especially in the old guard news media, I do not believe it is just an "accident". It is politically driven, no doubt. One media research group reported not too long ago that for every 11 news articles that were gun-control, anti-gun oriented, there was one anti-gun control, pro-gun oriented article. IIRC, it was Accuracy in Media."

Yep. And if those news organizations cared a bit about their own bias, they would have changed a long time ago. They have no excuse. They can not claim mere lack of firearms knowledge.

Anyone remember what that scumbag Wolff Blitzer (sp?) did awhile ago on CNN with the whole AWB and the AK's? I bet dimes to donuts that guy wakes up every morning with a clear conscience.

I wouldn't trust CNN/ABC/NBC/CBS if they reported that the Pope was Catholic.

Alan Smithiee
July 7, 2003, 07:00 PM
just a brief note to remind people that not everyone in Idaho sees marxist's under every bed and behind every news broadcast.

although we DO have the same problems with media everyone else seems to, pro Money, pro Sensationalism pro "it bleeds it leads" ignorance on firearm issues.

TheEgg
July 7, 2003, 07:12 PM
I have never worked in a news organization. But I had to deal with them for several years, giving interviews, answering questions, etc. Two facts stick out--

1. Reporters NEVER EVER get all the facts straight. You can spell it out for them, write it down for them, they NEVER EVER GET IT ALL RIGHT. Remember this when reading/watching a news story -- almost all reporters will get a very significant percentage of the facts that they are reporting WRONG. I cannot emphasize this enough -- BEWARE of taking the "facts" reported by these people as gospel, until confirmed by multiple sources
2. I never observed any signs of a cabal, or organized effort to promote "progressive" ideals. It was much more subtle than that, and even more pervassive. Most reporters/editors I ran across where liberals, and had the basic underlying assumption that conservatives where either stupid or evil. This was (and I believe still is) so automatic in many reporters/editors makeup that they do not even understand this about themselves, but it colors every story they do.

Only recently have we begun to get some balance in some news organizations -- not that FOX and others don't suffer from similar problems listed above, but at least their bias is from the other side, and by observing both species, we can sometimes get a little closer to the truth.

Monkeyleg
July 7, 2003, 07:18 PM
I can provide anyone with ample evidence that our local paper spikes their stories with anti-gun spin. Someday, when I have time, I want to go down to the paper's archives and get the microfiche file (yes, it's that old) of one of the stories they did on assault weapons. Nobody on this forum would believe that such an article could even be published anywhere.

Just a few weeks ago, I had a letter to the editor printed in which a sentence, in part, said "...fully automatic ('machine gun') fire or semiautomatic (one pull of the trigger)..."

Well, the paper took out the words in parentheses. Why do you think they did that? Could it be that most people don't know the meaning of the term "fully automatic?"

They once ran a story on gun shows, and ran a photo from the last show of a table of bolt-action rifles. The caption said that both semiautomatic and automatic weapons were for sale at the show. I called the editor and raised hell, telling her that I had been to the show and I had also called the show's promoter after seeing the story, just to verify that there were no Class III dealers there.

The paper printed a retraction, but that's just more evidence of either bias or complete stupidity. Sort of like saying that US troops were attacked by Baathist loyalists using AK-47's and cruise missiles.

If you enjoyed reading about "How Firearm Incidents are Reported by The Media" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!