Today’s media vilifies anyone who supports the Second Amendment.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!
by an annual salary of $56,974 for a mere 10-hour work week — decided to endorse a political candidate, Harris, for the first time in its six-year history, the media absolutely erupted with support.
Even Rolling Stone published a glowing report, which was based entirely on a written statement from the nonprofit. Evidently, the March kids were too busy marching to answer the phone.
“Harris leads the who leads [sic] the new White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, and in March visited Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, touring the classroom where the mass shooting took place. March for Our Lives lauded Harris as a lawmaker actively engaged with their mission,” Rolling Stone wrote.
In an actual interview with ABC News, Natalie Fall, executive director of March for Our Lives, said, “We see a lot of energy around Vice President Harris in this election; there’s no denying that. I think everybody’s seeing it right now.”
England’s Sky News, which is owned by Comcast, couldn’t get an interview with Harris, but still wanted to offer their support. In a story published Monday, Sky News cited comments from one of Harris’ previous speeches.
“Our nation is being torn apart by the tragedy of it all and torn apart by the fear and trauma that results from gun violence,” Harris said in a 2023 speech. “President Biden and I believe in the second amendment, [sic] but we also know common sense solutions are at hand.”
Betsy Reed, a U.S.-based editor forThe Guardian, also British, published a story Thursday in support of Harris’ first campaign ad — a television ad.
“Throughout that ad, a Law & Order SVU-like deep male voice directly compares Harris and Trump, beginning, ‘He’s a world leader in temper tantrums. She never loses her cool. She prosecuted sex predators. He is one.’ It ends by calling Harris the ‘anti-Trump,’” Reed wrote.
Media bias explained
Why is the corporate media so slavish in its support of Harris? Why are reporters, editors and producers so willing to go to the mattresses for a one-term Veep who even the Dems admit hasn’t done a whole lot? The answer is simple: Guns are bad, the media believes, so any politician who opposes civilian firearm ownership is a hero.
Today’s corporate media practices a groupthink that vilifies anyone who supports the Second Amendment. Over the years, I’ve tracked examples of this collective thinking. Here are the most current examples.
This is what the media actually believes:
Guns are evil. All guns should be banned. No one needs a gun.
All gun owners are gun-nuts, rubes, hicks and hillbillies.
All pro-gun lawmakers are crazy. Vilify them at will. Anything goes.
All anti-gun lawmakers are heroes. They should be praised and protected from scorn.
All anti-gun legislation — even if its unworkable, such as micro-stamping or “smart gun” technology — should be mandatory and strongly supported.
All pro-gun legislation should be framed as crazy and ridiculed using outright lies and extreme examples.
All pro-gun groups are obstructing the goal of total civilian disarmament and should be ridiculed and vilified. No mention should ever be made of their training, hunter education and gun safety programs.
Concealed carry — especially Constitutional Carry — is deadly and leads to more violence. It should be criticized at every opportunity, as should those who carry concealed firearms.
If a concealed carrier uses their firearm to save a life, it should not be reported unless they’re sued or criminally charged.
Anyone who challenges this accepted conventional wisdom — especially another journalist — is the enemy.
The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn’t be possible without you. Click here to make a tax-deductible donation to support pro-gun stories like this.
