General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn Month After Charlottesville, Papers Spent as Much Time Condemning Anti-Nazis as Nazis
In Month After Charlottesville, Papers Spent as Much Time Condemning Anti-Nazis as Nazis
The medias both sides fetish is uniquely unsuited for the Trump era.
?itok=jlk92WjM
"With a major publication like Politico expressly telling its reporters to avoid criticism of physical attacks on journalists and white supremacy on social mediaso as to not appear partisanone is compelled to ask, of what use is the pretense of 'objectivity'?" Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Since the Charlottesville attack a month ago, a review of commentary in the six top broadsheet newspapersthe Wall Street Journal, New York Times, USA Today, LA Times, San Jose Mercury News and Washington Postfound virtually equal amounts of condemnation of fascists and anti-fascist protesters. Between August 12 and September 12, these papers ran 28 op-eds or editorials condemning the anti-fascist movement known as antifa, or calling on politicians to do so, and 27 condemning neo-Nazis and white supremacists, or calling on politiciansnamely Donald Trumpto do so.
For the purposes of this survey, commentary that drew a comparison between antifa and neo-Nazis, but devoted the bulk of its argument to condemning antifa, was categorized as anti-antifa. There were no op-eds or editorials framed as condemnations of both sides that spent as much or more time condemning or criticizing neo-Nazis. The both sides framewhich was employed by Donald Trump in the wake of the attack, and endorsed by white supremacist David Dukewas almost always used a vehicle to highlight and denounce antifa, with a to be sure line about neo-Nazis thrown in for good measure. A breakdown of the op-eds and editorials can be found here.
While most both sides columns added a qualifier clarifying that there was no moral equivalency between antifa and neo-Nazis, this framing could not help but imply that there was. And a few explicitly argued that, yes, anti-fascism was just as bad as fascism:
Marc Theissen: Yes, Antifa Is the Moral Equivalent of Neo-Nazis (Washington Post, 8/17/17)
James S. Robbins: Trump Is RightViolent Extremists on Both Sides Are a Threat (USA Today, 8/30/17)
Alan Dershowitz: The Hard Right and Hard Left Pose Different Dangers (Wall Street Journal, 9/10/17)
Alan Dershowitzs op-ed took it slightly further than the others, seeming to suggest antifa was actually more dangerous, though the famous litigator played coy with this implication:
The danger posed by the extreme hard left is more about the future. Leaders of tomorrow are being educated today on campus. The tolerance for censorship and even violence to suppress dissenting voices may be a foretaste of things to come.
. . . .
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/09/14/month-after-charlottesville-papers-spent-much-time-condemning-anti-nazis-nazis
meow2u3
(24,764 posts)Alan Dershowitz, James S. Robbins, etc., are all right-wing apologists and all liberal bashers.