Sunday, March 25, 2018

What to Call a Counterprotester

What do the following headlines have in common?

"Demonstrators who brought guns and an opposing message 'shoot back'"

"Supporters of the Second Amendment staged counterprotests in state capitals and city centers"

They both introduce the same March 24, 2018 news article in the NYT, only varying depending on the format of the device used to access the article.

The first headline is fairly objective. But the second one uses a charged term that the gun people prefer when referring to their movement.

If the counterprotesters are "supporters of the second amendment", that would strongly suggest that the primary protest could be described as "opponents of the second amendment". But the truth is more complicated. The counterprotesters can be described as opponents of an assault weapons ban or opponents of restrictions on guns, but labeling them with the catchall term "supporters of the second amendment", while economical, casts the gun people as those on the constitutional high ground and the people in favor of reasonable restrictions on guns as somehow advocating illegality.

The NYT, as a purportedly liberal news organization, leans toward letting conservatives define themselves in order to maintain the appearance of objectivity. But this avoidance of faithfully reporting the news based on facts in context is a consistent point of failure.

In a similar vein, instead of reporting statements made by Trump and Republicans accurately, the Times will instead report that "Trump believes..." or "Ryan believes...". So, in any case where Trump or Ryan makes a tactical statement about policy that they do not actually believe, the Times takes them for their word. This faulty approach by the Times lends support to politicians who lie for effect.

More to come on this tactic and flawed reporting.