It’s Another Season of Media Hysteria

They can’t help themselves

The media will never stop. They are not confident in just ballot stuffing nor judicial manipulations with regards to Trump. They had to resort to ye olde edited line hysteria. Former president Trump made a remark about the auto industry and provided a sweet line about it being a bloodbath for them if he is not elected. This is the same bit they have done for nearly a decade now. Welcome to the general election season.

The manipulation of quotes through deceptive editing is a powerful tool in the arsenal of media outlets seeking to sway public opinion and shape narratives. When used unethically, it distorts the intended meaning of statements, misrepresent individuals, and contribute to the erosion of trust in media. This practice, often termed quote mining, involves extracting phrases or sentences from their original context to create a misleading impression about the speaker's intentions or beliefs. This was deployed against Trump since 2015, but really has been an historical tool of the media that recent technological developments and the rise of alt media have stymied.

Let’s review some greatest hits that have been countered by subjects wise to the game and destroyed by alternative media.

In 2012, the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman was an election year media hysteria. NBC News found itself embroiled in controversy when it aired an edited version of Zimmerman's 911 call. The edited clip made it appear as though Zimmerman volunteered Trayvon's race without prompting, suggesting racial profiling. In reality, the unedited transcript revealed that Zimmerman had responded to a dispatcher's inquiry about Trayvon's race. The deceptive editing fueled accusations of racism against Zimmerman and intensified public outrage. Surprisingly, NBC News issued an apology and fired several employees involved in the incident. The case highlighted the power of deceptive editing to manipulate public perception and undermine trust in media accuracy and impartiality. Many of you are reading this because of how that case changed your view of everything.

In 2016, journalist Katie Couric came under fire for her documentary "Under the Gun," which addressed gun control in the United States. In one scene, Couric interviewed members of the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) about background checks for gun purchases. The documentary depicted a long pause after Couric asked a question about preventing felons and terrorists from obtaining guns, suggesting that the interviewees were unable to answer. However, raw audio revealed that the VCDL members had responded immediately with thoughtful answers. Couric's team had intentionally inserted the pause to create a misleading impression of the interviewees' hesitation. Lesson learned was to record your own copies of any interviews. The controversy surrounding the deceptive editing tarnished Couric's reputation as a journalist and fueled skepticism about the documentary's credibility and objectivity. It underscored the importance of transparency and integrity in media production and reinforced concerns about biased agenda-setting.

This is not to say right wing media is not above this. In 2010, Breitbart published a selectively edited video clip of Shirley Sherrod, then-USDA official, speaking at an NAACP event. The edited clip portrayed Sherrod as admitting to racial discrimination against a white farmer. Consequently, Sherrod faced immediate condemnation, and the USDA demanded her resignation. However, a review of the full speech revealed that Sherrod's full remarks were different. In reality, she was recounting a personal journey toward overcoming racial prejudice and assisting the farmer in question. The incident highlighted the dangers of rushing to judgment based on selectively edited content and underscored the need for media consumers to critically evaluate information before forming opinions.

These examples illustrate how deceptive editing can distort the truth, manipulate public perception, and erode trust in media institutions. The Trump era has kicked all of this into overdrive as a target that is irresistible to the media meets a media landscape far different than even the Zimmerman-Martin event. When audiences perceive that media outlets prioritize ideological agendas over factual accuracy and fairness, they become increasingly skeptical and disillusioned. Some libs will always believe Trump said bloodbath as in killings if he loses, but the rapid pushback alternative media and dissemination of the full clip via social media hurt the media’s efforts.

To rebuild trust, media organizations must adhere to rigorous ethical standards (you are laughing, right?), prioritize transparency and accountability (for their enemies), and allow audiences to critically evaluate information. Only through a commitment to integrity and credibility can the media regain the trust of the public it serves. This will not happen. What will happen is the media will become an archipelago. What we call the legacy media will morph into a mouth of the national security system and big business. Individuals with credibility from delivering true information will be another island of information dispersal. Raw video and audio spread via social media and informal networks will be another island. How AI fakes affect all of these islands remains to be seen. The right hates the media for its lies and ideological conflicts. The young are skeptical of anything from the legacy media. It is a wild future ahead of us, but one where the old hold legacy media had on the discourse is long gone.