In Month After Charlottesville, Papers Spent as Much Time Condemnin...

Adam Johnson found just as much denounciation of Antifa as of Nazis in 6 leading papers, since Charlottesville.

The “both sides” frame—which was employed by Donald Trump in the wake of the attack, and endorsed by white supremacist David Duke—was almost always used a vehicle to highlight and denounce antifa, with a “to be sure” line about neo-Nazis thrown in for good measure.
The Wall Street Journal seemed particularly averse to calling out Trump for soft-pedaling and dog-whistling white supremacists. A recent Guardian expose (9/10/17) documented how dozens of writers have left the Journal in response to corporate pressure to “normalize” the Republican president—an effort evident in the uniformly positive takes on Trump’s response to Charlottesville. [emphasis mine]

I've noticed, with revulsion, the same thing in mainstream media as Johnson did, a one sentence disclaimer - saying there's no comparison between fascist and antifascist violence - to "cover" a long almost-rant denouncing Antifa. The thinnest veneer distracts readers' moral guard to an article that's a vehicle for right wing agitprop.

image sources: tattoos, veneer, trump (text mine)

Views: 41

Replies to This Discussion

I anticipate we'll be seeing "false flag" operations, à la the infamous cointelpro in the 70s, to blame more violence on the left.

And speaking of the 70s, a flashback:

(I tried to embed but it didn't work.)


© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service