If you think media bias is bad now, brace yourself.
It’s no secret that students these days are being taught to be biased in the direction of the “progressive” point of view. The trend in journalism “education” is even more pronounced.
For example, Burlington College in the People’s Republic of Vermont offers a degree in “media activism,” symbolized by a clenched fist. The college says, “The degree is conceived explicitly for those who want to become media activists. Through technical training rooted in history and theory, students are encouraged to apply media making technique, craft, and art to issues of advocacy, activism and social change.”
One of the courses toward the media activism degree at Burlington is called “Historical Activism and Social Movements,” in which “Students will examine the social, economic, demographic, and political reasons that drive people into the streets demanding change, and the organizing and media making strategies which make it successful.” The course will “examine the much discussed contemporary movements (Occupy Wall Street, Arab Spring, and European Austerity Protests) as well as historical and lesser known examples (Black Power, WWI, abolition, anti-corporate globalization and anti-colonial struggles).”
We found a similar course, “Media Activism and Social Movements,” at New York University’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development.
What is clearly missing is any discussion in these course descriptions of the Tea Party movement of grassroots conservatives as a development of interest or study. Instead, these courses are consumed with the idea that “social change” comes exclusively from the left and moves the country in a “progressive” direction.
The Tea Party movement, however, has been a tremendous force for social change in the United States—against the power of socialism. That’s one reason why so many Tea Party groups were targeted by Obama’s IRS.
As a result, the American Center for Law & Justice is representing dozens of Tea Party, conservative, and pro-life organizations in a federal lawsuit against the IRS.
Tea Party organizers are now running for Congress. Becky Gerritson, President of the Wetumpka Tea Party in Alabama, is a candidate for U.S. Congress in the very conservative 2nd district. She’s trying to take the Republican nomination for Congress away from Rep. Martha Roby, a John Boehner loyalist.
Left-wing activist groups increasingly make up the ranks not only of students but professors. Last year we reported on a feminist professor of communications at the University of Michigan who wrote a column in a socialist newspaper about the academic basis for hating Republicans. Susan J. Douglas had begun the column with the statement, “I hate Republicans” and declared that “marrying a Republican is unimaginable to me…”
When the media disregard basic elements of professional journalism, such as reporting who, what, when, where, why and how, the result can only be desperation on the part of news consumers, eager for alternative sources of news and information.
Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) tapped into this discontent when he aggressively attacked news media bias at the CNBC Republican presidential debate on Wednesday night. “The questions that have been asked so far in this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media,” he said, noting the personal attacks on the Republicans. “How about talking about the substantive issues the people care about?”
As we discussed in our recent column, “The Vindication of Reed Irvine,” the Republican presidential candidates who attack the media, or are attacked BY the media, are going up in the polls.
Look for Senator Cruz to benefit from his masterful response to the CNBC “journalists” who moderated the Wednesday night debate.
He summarized the questions they were asking of the candidates this way:
“Are you a comic-book villain?”
“Can you do math?”
“Will you insult two people over here?”
“Why don’t you resign?”
“Why have your numbers fallen?”
Cruz is now asking people to “join me in declaring war on the liberal media agenda and taking back our country to deal with the substantive issues the people care about.”
Public disgust with media bias is one reason why Internet-delivered television systems, such as Roku, are growing in acceptance. Viewers can buy a Roku device for under $100 and bypass cable and satellite systems like CNBC, CNN, MSNBC, and even Fox News. But the real attraction is that independent conservative groups are able to take advantage of the technology and develop a channel, for a relatively inexpensive price, and compete for viewers. Roku is the future of television. It gives people true freedom of choice.
Conservatives also find hope in the growing number of citizen journalists and watchdog organizations engaged in the journalism business.
The Center for Medical Progress, which is releasing the Planned Parenthood videos on the harvesting of baby parts, describes itself as “a group of citizen journalists dedicated to monitoring and reporting on medical ethics and advances.” The group has made national news and has sparked the creation of a House select panel within the Energy and Commerce Committee for the purpose of investigating abortion practices.
James O’Keefe of Project Veritas, who almost single-handedly took down the Alinskyite ACORN organization, has recently been exposing questionable, if not illegal, conduct by the Hillary Clinton for President campaign. He wrote the book, Breakthrough: Our Guerilla War to Expose Fraud and Save Democracy.
These are a few of the groups promoting real “social change” that the liberals won’t highlight in their courses on “media activism.”
Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism, and can be contacted at email@example.com