CBS Writer on Gun Control: More Bias Needed!
Brian Montopoli at the CBS News Public Eye blog writes:
As this latest tragedy [VA Tech -js] once again illustrates, however, the availability of guns is a major issue in this country. The press corps doesn’t need a debate in the halls of Congress to recognize that. Certainly, the international press corps has focused on the issue in the wake of the shootings; the British-based Economist, for example, put an American flag in the shape of a gun on its cover and proclaimed that the country’s “politicians are still running away from a debate about guns.”
In America, meanwhile, many media outlets have been either ignoring the gun control issue or urging citizens to “leave the debate for another day.”
But what day would that be? In order to delve into a big issue, the media usually needs what’s known as a “hook” – a news event that focuses people’s attention on larger questions. The tragedy at Virginia Tech is such an event.
[…]
…I’m hard pressed to think of a better time for the media to focus on a huge issue that isn’t going away anytime soon.
So what Montopoli appears to say is that since media thinks there’s a problem of gun availability in this country, it’s up to media to fan the flames of the people to demand more gun control laws. Notice that he doesn’t want to use a story of how some citizen prevented a killing or ended a tragedy as the “hook” for the “discussion” but rather the horrific and rare shooting at Virginia Tech as such.
Help me out here, folks, I’m trying to remember the last time CBS or NBC or CNN or the New York Times or the Washington Post or National Public Radio covered a story of a law abiding citizen defending himself or his family with a firearm or stopping a rampage.
Here’s a list of some that come to mind:
End of list.
Update: NewsBusters provides a handy list of major news media ignoring the issue.
12 Responses to “CBS Writer on Gun Control: More Bias Needed!”



on 26 Apr 2007 at 7:58 am # Old Dog
Jeff,
If you are waiting for theMSM to air or publish a positive gun article; please do not hold your breath. We need you!
on 26 Apr 2007 at 8:19 am # George
I added a post on the CBS article and when I posted it the following line was suppose to be:
“I am from NY and I know that gun control disarms everyone, including blacks, jews, gays and every other group you want to name and allowes them to be attacked by the people who hate them.”
But when it was posted it was:
“I am from NY and I know that gun control disarms everyone, including blacks, jews, *** and every other group you want to name and allowes them to be attacked by the people who hate them.”
Am I wrong? Is the word “gay” now an unaccectable word at all times? Am I too isolated or out of touch?
When are you going to change the:
“Alphecca is an occasional blog of opinions by an independent, libertarian, gay gun nut in Vermont.”
To:
“Alphecca is an occasional blog of opinions by an independent, libertarian, *** gun nut in Vermont.”
george
on 26 Apr 2007 at 8:37 am # Dusty
Debates? Who needs debates when the media has a news hook and Photoshop. If it isn’t politicans in government telling us smucks what is right and good for us, it’s the politicians in the media.
Let the Photoshopping begin!!!
on 26 Apr 2007 at 9:45 am # Fritz
While it isn’t much, and was not a rampage, The New York Times did carry the story of Venus Ramey. Googling her only produces 287 hits and the Times was the only big outlet I saw that appeared, but a Lexis-Nexis search might do better. To be honest, I was shocked to find that they had, but perhaps they thought that it was acceptable to run a story about the former Miss America and a firearm as long as no one was hurt. While I only went through a few pages of Google returns, most of the other media outlets that carried it seemed to be smaller and in red states. If I wasn’T so lazy I would run searches for her on all the major news outlets and see what showed up. Other than that, I don’t remember the last time a story that involved firearms wasn’t written to discredit firearms.
on 26 Apr 2007 at 9:54 am # Jeff Soyer
Since moving to WordPress, I no longer screen any words. The word gay is not filtered, nor are any other words that I know of. . .
on 26 Apr 2007 at 10:22 am # Bob Leibowitz
Canticle4Leibowitz.comSome of these folks miss the point entirely.
Virginia Tech wasn’t Columbine. Vriginia Tech was 9/11. Before 9/11 the issue in aviation circles and among government leaders was, “How do we cooperate with the bad guys, go along to get along so as to minimize risks?” UAL 93 showed us the difference, what a few determined and courageous people can do to make a difference.
The conversation after Virginia Tech is not, “How do we create more gun-free (free fire for the bad guys) zones?” It is, “How do we empower prospective victims?”
See “Is Virginia Tech Education’s ‘9/11′?” at
www.Canticle4Leibowitz.com
on 26 Apr 2007 at 10:37 am # George
Just to make it clear:
It was the CBS News Public Eye blog that replaced the word “gay” with “***”
george
on 26 Apr 2007 at 11:10 am # Kevin Baker
“Help me out here, folks, I’m trying to remember the last time CBS or NBC or CNN or the New York Times or the Washington Post or National Public Radio covered a story of a law abiding citizen defending himself or his family with a firearm or stopping a rampage.”
Jeff, the only one I can remember is the story of a Ms. Johnson, the (I believe) 56 year-old wheelchair bound woman from Harlem who shot a mugger in the elbow with her .357 Magnum. As the story goes, she was on her way to the target range to practice when the mugger grabbed her, so she pulled her pistol and shot him. No charges were filed against Ms. Johnson.
This, despite the fact that she only had a “premises” permit, and was supposed to transport the firearm unloaded, secure in a case, with the ammunition in a separate case.
I’ve always wondered since if she had her premises permit yanked for having the audacity to defend herself in New York.
on 26 Apr 2007 at 11:27 am # ron
Sadly, the media is now going into overdrive on the gun control issue. They gave their 10 day grace period and now there are editorials everyday.
Today’s SF Chronicle (big surprise there!) claimed that the AWB “could” have stopped some of the killing if it wasn’t allowed to sunset because it is “believed” that the shooter had a 15 round magazine. Did he? Or did he have a large mag for the .22, which I believe wasn’t touched by the AWB.
on 26 Apr 2007 at 12:10 pm # Californio
Ha Ha. OK. Does the media realize that if they are given what they want it will be used in a manner they later find abhorent? a’la unforeseen consequences? Take “The press corps doesn’t need a debate in the halls of Congress to recognize that. ” Now imagine that the majority of the “press corps” decides something offensive - well no need to argue, comrade, just surrender to the decision of the collective! Ah, what a glorious future we shall have! Just remember - no tears for those burnt by the sun of the revolution, er um, I didn’t mean revolution, I meant “the truth”. Onward!!!
on 26 Apr 2007 at 12:59 pm # Steve
Jeff,
Be careful what you wish for. Recently here in Cleveland, OH a concealed-carry permit holder had occasion to shoot a 15 year old thug who was attempting to rob the victim on his own porch. Fairly straight-forward self-defense, right? I mean, the shooting happened on Saturday and by Monday the prosecutor announced that the shooter would not be charged. So what’s the media angle? Of course! How a promising young life was snuffed out, the outraged protests (by the thug’s kin) that the shooter was not charged, the vandalism of the shooter’s home by supporters of the thug, etc. Any angle EXCEPT “this guy is alive today because he was armed”
on 26 Apr 2007 at 1:20 pm # Jeff Soyer
alphecca.comYou must have missed my rant from the other day. It was about the Cleveland self-defensive shooting!