Media Matters: Right-wing media and the fringe: A growing history of violence (and denial)
This week, the country's attention was captured by the horrific shooting at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, allegedly by James W. von Brunn, an 88-year-old man with ties to white supremacist and anti-Semitic organizations. The fatal shooting came just two months after an April 7 Department of Homeland Security report detailing potential increases in right-wing extremism.
As Media Matters for America documented, the DHS report was immediately and vehemently rejected by numerous conservative commentators, such as Lou Dobbs, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin, and David Asman, who portrayed it as an illegitimate and politically motivated assault on conservatives. (Media Matters Senior Fellow Karl Frisch puts the attacks in even broader perspective here.)
Following the Holocaust Memorial Museum attack, these commentators faced criticism for their earlier dismissiveness. Some have since unconvincingly (and in the case of Joe Scarborough, inaccurately) defended their past assessment, and a handful of reporters and analysts are still engaging in falsehoods and inconsistencies in criticizing the DHS report. But on Fox News, Shepard Smith took a different position -- for which he was attacked by conservatives -- saying that the report "was a warning to us all. And it appears now that they were right."
The day before the Holocaust Memorial Museum attack, Media Matters Senior Fellow Eric Boehlert wrote that Fox News and its hosts "will have more right-wing vigilantism to explain." He added that "militia-style vigilante rhetoric has become a cornerstone of the conservative media movement in America, and it's now proudly championed by Fox News on a nearly hourly basis." (He also appeared on CNN this week.)
While right-wing media are certainly not legally culpable for any recent attacks, they are responsible for promoting a culture of fear, paranoia, and violence that is anti-government in the extreme -- a culture in which extremists, including von Brunn and Richard Poplawski, who fatally shot three Pittsburgh police officers, were apparently immersed. Poplawski was convinced that the Obama administration was going to take away his guns. Even though no evidence of such a policy exists, right-wing commentators and news organizations made the claim repeatedly before the shooting and have continued to do so since.
Predictably, conservative media figures responded to the museum shooting by attempting to shift attention away from themselves and onto political liberals and even President Obama himself. On June 10, the day of the museum shooting, financial analyst and radio host Jim Lacamp said on Fox News that "we have an administration that's really done a lot of class warfare, a lot of class-baiting. And so, it sets the stage for social unrest." That same day, conservative Tammy Bruce wrote that the Obama administration's "increasing anti-Israel rhetoric and the pandering to the Jew-hating world Arab world ... encourages all the beasts among us." Newsmax.com published an op-ed, cited on Friday by Michael Savage, claiming that Obama "is most certainly creating a climate of hate against" Jews. Colorado radio host Bob Newman even raised questions about whether Obama's recent visit to a concentration camp, or his statement about Israeli settlements, were factors in the shooting.
But as always, the most virulent reality-denier was Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh claimed that von Brunn "is a leftist if anything." He said that Obama is "ramping up hatred for Israel" and that "anti-Jew rhetoric comes from the American left." He claimed that MSNBC broadcasts "hate 24/7." Despite the right wing's repeated use of violent, revolutionary rhetoric, Limbaugh said that it was actually Obama who "thrives and needs chaos" to succeed. And in response to Shepard Smith, he remarked that the "claim that the atmosphere is somehow more violently anti-Obama is simply preposterous."
Indeed, Smith's remarks were the exception for the right. Despite its love of fearmongering, Fox News spent the 24 hours after the von Brunn shooting downplaying it. And on his broadcast that night, Bill O'Reilly, who hypocritically and incorrectly criticized the media for a supposed lack of coverage after the shooting death of Army recruiter Pvt. William Long, and who stokes the anger of viewers whenever it suits him politically, barely mentioned the shooting and instead featured what he called a "very important story" on gay penguins. "Do they wear tight T-shirts?" he asked, laughing. During the two shows after the shooting, Hannity barely mentioned it.
Other major stories this week:
Newt in the news
This was a big week for former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who is clearly attempting to position himself as the new (aka, old) voice of the GOP. (And according to USA Today, he's in the running.)
Newt, who had previously backed off of referring to Judge Sonia Sotomayor as a "racist," began the week by modifying his argument and repeating the dubious claim that she "clearly supported racial quotas" in the Frank Ricci case.
He followed it up at a congressional Republican fundraiser by proudly declaring that he was "not a citizen of the world," saying that "the entire concept is intellectual nonsense and stunningly dangerous." CNN's Candy Crowley and CQ Politics' Jonathan Allen reported Gingrich's statement without noting that President Ronald Reagan made similar remarks while addressing the United Nations in 1982. (You would think that Gingrich, a former history teacher, would have known better.) After Media Matters documented the oversight, MSNBC's David Shuster and Keith Olbermann, as well as by NBC's Brian Williams, subjected Gingrich's remarks to scrutiny.
Newt closed the week by reacting to a Weekly Standard article discussing the ongoing U.S. practice of reading Miranda rights to detainees. On Fox News' Hannity, Gingrich said that it was "unimaginable. It's worse than anything Jimmy Carter ever did. It's worse than anything that President Bill Clinton ever did." In doing so, he ignored the part of the article reporting that the FBI also Mirandized people at "specific bases" during the Bush administration.
Newt's factually challenged analysis has come to be so legendary that even MSNBC's Mike Barnicle felt compelled to ask, "[W]hy would anyone pay attention to anything he says?" It's a good question. Perhaps it's because networks like Fox News do whatever they can to make Gingrich, who hasn't held any office or official position since 1998, relevant.
Health care reform is coming, and the news is already making me sick
All three national networks covered a Thursday town hall meeting that Obama held in Wisconsin, during which he laid out his health care proposals in detail. And yet, not one of them reported on the substance of his remarks, focusing instead on a note he wrote for a 10-year-old girl who was skipping school.
On Friday, NPR's Mara Liasson claimed that the American Medical Association opposes a public plan as a component of health care reform, even though the AMA had backtracked the same day, stating that it was "willing to consider other variations of a public plan that are currently under discussion in Congress." Flaws in a New York Times story the day before about the AMA's position were the subject of Media Matters Senior Fellow Jamison Foser's column this week.
And during a Wednesday interview with Pennsylvania Sen. Bob Casey, MSNBC's Norah O'Donnell freely editorialized, lecturing him on how current proposals seemingly would "drive the deficit into these stratospheric numbers" and complaining that senators were engaging in "gobbledygook" on the issue.
The need for accurate and impartial reporting on impending legislation is made all the more acute by the long history and prevalence of misinformation from media conservatives on the issue. On Thursday, Limbaugh began pulling out the stops, sounding not unlike O'Donnell in the process. "And it's all about control," he said. "It's not about cost. This man's not worried about the cost of anything. He doesn't care what anything costs: a trip to New York for a date -- $12 trillion in debt over 10 years? He doesn't care what things cost." He went on to hypothesize that "exercise freaks ... are the ones putting stress on the health care system" because they keep getting injured.
Buchanan continues to test how much MSNBC will tolerate
Media Matters has already documented Pat Buchanan's racially charged and often sexist campaign against Sotomayor. Despite his recent (and past) behavior, however, MSNBC has provided Buchanan with a prominent platform from which to spew his invective. This week, Foser asked a question MSNBC -- which in the past has had to fire Michael Savage and Don Imus for their remarks -- should answer: just what would Pat Buchanan have to say to be fired from the network?
Well, during this past week, Buchanan was curiously absent from much of MSNBC's commentary. Was it a sign that the network might be re-evaluating its relationship with one of its favorite "analysts"? If so, it should take note of the fact that Buchanan is set to host what the Southern Poverty Law Center called a "prominent white nationalist" at the upcoming conference of The American Cause, a Buchanan-led organization.
Conservative Misinformation U
Here now, for your enjoyment, is the graduating class, whose standouts are too numerous to name, of Conservative Misinformation University, 2009.
It would be funnier if it weren't true. For America's sake, they should have been held back.
This week's media columns
This week's media columns from the Media Matters Senior Fellows: Eric Boehlert prophetically details why O'Reilly and Fox News will have more right-wing vigilantism to explain; Jamison Foser explains why AMA reporting needs a second opinion; and Karl Frisch has something to say about that DHS report.
Don't forget to order your autographed copy of Eric Boehlert's compelling new book, Bloggers on the Bus: How the Internet Changed Politics and the Press (Free Press, May 2009).
If you use the social networking site Facebook, be sure to join the official Media Matters page and those of our senior fellows Eric Boehlert, Jamison Foser, and Karl Frisch as well. You can also follow Media Matters, Boehlert, Foser, and Frisch on Twitter.
This weekly wrap-up was compiled by John V. Santore, an associate at Media Matters.















On Olbermann the other day, Jack Levin couldn't help but indict the Left with a "they do it too" canard.
Taylor Marsh nails him good on this-- but I'm amazed that no one else caught this obscenity-- this phony equivalence that only pours gasoline on the "Lefties are the anti-Semites" crowd.
http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/06/minuteman-leader-arrested-for-double-homicide/
More rightwing terrorism brought to you by the inflamers of the reich...
I don't want to sound paranoid, but I'm starting to get a bit concerned about the increasing amount of violence. I can only hope that there's not more violence, but more reporting of violence as more people turn toward the now popular idea that right-wing ideology-inspired violence is on the rise. Time will tell, I guess.
THANK YOU.
njguy93@yahoo.com
I wouldn't dismiss that stuff so casually.
These anti-choice nutcases and White Supremacists use their violence to terrorize whole groups of people. The impact is much greater than the single shooting.
I'm not buying the equivalency either, Wes. Because there is none.
THANK YOU.
njguy93@yahoo.com
They are also responsible for the failure to inject truth and reality into their discussions. It seems apparent to most that the Conservative ideology can't stand up to fair and reasonable examination and so their only option is to lie about themselves and their opposition.
In Germany it took years of constant indoctrination to get the people to look the other way while they annihilated the Jews. Any truth that may come out is immediately and comprehensibly attacked as wrong. So omitting material facts is the only way they can present their case with such effectiveness.
It's all propaganda all the time.
Soon their lies will reach a breaking point. I call it the Morton Downey Junior effect. In his case he attempted to keep his audience by becoming more outrageous each time his show went on. In the end his show became so unhinged that people lost interest in it.
Of course we are a "Marxist" country! LOL.
The days since the hate-shootings (both of them) have been very difficult to watch ANY of Fox's usual fantastical "news" - even as clips shown on the fake news, The Daily Show (w/John Stewart). How weird –or pathetic- is it that the fake news (Stewart) is one of the only pure forms of “fair and balanced” (and actual and accurate) news outlets on the air today?
As a recent Criminal Justice/History graduate, I learned to be expecting that as these desperate economic times continue, crimes will become more heinous in nature and more frequent. But for these Christocrats (a.k.a. Limbaugh, O’Reilly, Hannity, & the rest) to fill the airwaves with their wildly inaccurate and their elitist hate only heightens the probability of more of these types of crimes –or worse- occurring. Except this time, we won’t have “illegal Mexicans,” “Muslim Terrorists,” or “Inner-city Blacks” to blame it on. It will be the 30-, 60-, or 80-yr-old average white guy, who has been told every day to believe that the afore mentioned stereotypes are coming for his money, his belongings, and his women, in some impending (albeit, fictional) “race war” that “they” are secretly gearing up for.
Let’s face it, the average ‘fan’ of the Fox (& like) is ignorant, misinformed, fear-based and panicky mobs. The unthinking, knee-jerk reactionary kind of mobs that Hate Preachers have to create, groom, and incite to do their greed-motivated Hate Crimes. And they will have them, Unless, YOU and I demand better from Fox & “friends.” Look at the changes this online community are already starting to make – small changes – perhaps – but CHANGES! WE ARE the viewing public, and we have a voice – a bigger one than their actual viewer-base! To use a piece of my previous comment:
Why don’t we just work to change this madness? Collectively change their all-important numbers (e.g., decrease viewership & advertising, and increase complaints to network moguls, etc...)?...
...Instead of just watching and disclosing the crap they are doing, let’s force THEM into the unheard minority the voting numbers reflect they are. It’s OUR time! They lost. DEAL WITH IT - just like we spent 8 years doing without a voice. I'm sick of it! I'm sick of Fox, their fear-mongering hatred for all things good, and I'm sick of doing nothing about it! To coin a movie phrase: "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!"
In 1985, Murdoch became a naturalized citizen "in order to satisfy the legal requirement that only US citizens were permitted to own American television stations." (Wikipedia), and he used that citizenship solely to buy a bully pulpit. His own money and power is his concern, not the well-being of the Great Experiment. IMO, his ownership of FOX threatens our democracy by subjecting the 1st Amendment to constant attack by having his mouthpiece(s) constantly yelling FIRE in a very crowded and tense theater when it's clear that they are simply attempting to incite panic for ratings and money...
If it weren't for Murdoch, the likes of Limbaugh and Savage would have their little fringe audiences, but FOX continually gives such bullies access to the incredibly omnipotent bully pulpit he purchased.
I disagreed with the FCC's 1995 judgement that Murdoch's ownership of FOX is "in the best interest of the United States."
Now we're experiencing how terribly his empire affects our country, but perhaps I'm just a xenophobic yahoo who's got a thing against immigrants... Funny how so many in FOX's viewership are suspicious of immigrants... Poor powerless ones...
We can't arrest someone for being stupid.
I just wish he didn't have platforms that let him broadcast his dangerous rhetoric.
Regardless, Beck won't be prosecuted, vile as his comments were. As I indicated, I would prefer to see him relegated to spouting his deranged rants on some street corner.
THANK YOU.
njguy93@yahoo.com
but plenty of journalists get arrested and detained here and around the world (for example, at the 2008 Dem Convention) for no other reason than just being journalists.
This guy, Beck, is as close to inciting sedition and violence, without _exactly_ doing so,
as one can get.
they are not just stating their opinions. They are deliberately fomenting and catering to the fringe element of our society using absolute fabrications.
For Limbaugh to claim Obama has a "God complex" he is _deliberately_ catering to those whose intellect is jaded with myth and distortion about how the world works in an attempt to cause some extreme action.
It is the same with Beck and his obsession with guns, you need to listen to the content and tone
of their rhetoric.
The __only__ way their premises and logic can be taken as substantive is if you take into account the seditious nature of their speech.
Sorry to have to lecture, but: Words Matter, and Media Matters
Not actual treason, just the "treason" (i.e. disagreement with the president) which conservatives were openly advocating arrest for a few years ago.
Of course we are a "Marxist" country" LOL.
Liberals have done a lot of race-baiting, too. Whenever stereotypes are used by the socialist welfare state agenda to pit one group of people against another in the "struggle" for the government spending of what is actually their own paychecks, hatred and violence is the result. Conservatives didn't create the Demo-Republican United Welfare States of America, which is completely dependent upon class, race and cultural polarization, as well as hateful stereotype-driven demagoguery.
How do you liberal wing nuts think Hitler's _socialist_ agenda was accomplished except by way of the very same stereotype-driven race and class based government enforced resource and income confiscation and redistribution as is currently practiced in the USA. You libbies always fall for the worst kind of do gooders; you just can't figure out that when somebody says they "need" the power to confiscate most of everybody's money and spend it to "improve the social condition,' they ALWAYS screw things up... for the very simple reason that the only incentive to work for a living is to enjoy the proceeds, not send the proceeds to political scum of any party, to squander on socially devastating agendas.
Hitler didn't have a socialist agenda. He had a fascist agenda. Let me clue you in on something. They're not the same. He took and kept by force, and fear, and intimidation.
The welfare state is a myth, perpetrated by folks like yourself, who seem to think that trying to provide for the small percentage of our countrymen and woman are poor is somehow a bad thing.
You're nuts if you think Hitler had a socialist/liberal agenda. Try reading some history.
As to your suggestion that jrrrrrr read some history, Mag, I'm guessing that it's not a big reader, more of a screechmonkey am radio consumer.
I wonder how long it will be until the Americans catch up to the rest of the civilized world and outlaw hate speech on TV.
Sad, but true.
Here is more on the Neo-Con hating Vonn Brunn:
MMfA's logic...he used a gun so he must be on the right! Yeah, that's the ticket!
Slow weekend for the interns MMfA?
I'm going to clue you in on a little secret about this guy...get real close to your monitor...
HE WAS A PSYCHO! You or the interns on this forum can't pigeon hole Vonn Brunn into any specific title (although you're trying your best) or banner.
But hey, we understand, it's you snoop.
Somehow omitted: He also hated black people, and he especially hated Obama because he believed he was controlled by Jews. (See the note he left behind.) He also hated the Federal Reserve, taxes, the United Nations, the federal government generically, admired Hitler, urged the reciminalization of miscegenation laws, and promoted The Protocols of the Seven Elders of Zion as fact. He worked at one time for Willis Carto's right-wing publishing house, Noontide Press, and used to sell copies of Carto's house organ The Spotlight.
Now I know the thought that admitting one of your own went psycho is painful to you, but contrary to your opinion, he's a RIGHT WING PSYCHO! And all his right wing buddies are singing his praises. Now just remember "lefty loosy" when you turn the nut...
I'm thinking t-bone also thinks shawna ford is a lefty too. And Atkissin, or tiller's killer. The rightwing nuts are coming out of the woodwork at an alarming rate and all the apologists can do is try to play down their right wing convictions by claiming psycho status. Apparently only liberal murderers are cold calculating sane folk. I just wish some right wing apologist could supply an actual liberal murderer's name...
Sounds like he was bible thumping conservative to me.
We have to ask ourselves (if we're being honest) that if he was hanging out with the White Russian's, then was he doing it as a double agent knowing his background up to that point?
Do you think?
You know, the silly opinion piece by some right winger who convinced you that Von Brunn wasn't a right winger?
I'm just giv'n him the business but as all humorless lib's go, you just can't take it.
Suck it up and do better next time.
Liberals think that Israel should be kept in check instead of being the 800-pound gorilla in the Middle East backed up by the force of the United States, so liberals are anti-Semites.
Von Brunn is an anti-Semite, and hates neo-cons because he associates them with Jews.
Therefore, von Brunn is a leftist. Is that how that's supposed to work?
Here's his missive about Obama:
It seems you know much more about this Adbusters magazine than any liberal. I don't think any of us have heard of such a magazine and yet you claim it's influential.
The Neocons proudly call themselves Neoconservatives and they're the ones who coined the term. Neoconservatives are basically indistinguishable from imperialists in my opinion.
And rants against globalization are found on the left and the right.
Why do peopleon teh right always seeit as race baiting when bigotry,racism,prejudice,intolerance and insensitivity are shown by fellow conservatives.The writer of a letter in the local paper's editorial page was outraged that Rush Limbaugh was called a blowhard by a columnist writing on this very subject!Limbaugh had just referred to Native Americans as "those clowns" a few days before..How can anyone fair minded(let alone religious) support such rhetoric!
Later on in the evening (same party), I was having a conversation with a righty about Sarah Palin. I told him that if he was so confident that she was smarter than everybody is giving her credit for, he better hope that she's the nominee against Obama in 2012. The guy's response: "You think he'll last that long?" I had ask him if he thought I meant 2016, and he said no. The implication was clear, and it was chilling. There are people on the right who are now publicly professing doubt that Obama is going to make it to the end of his first term, and this guy specifically didn't seem too concerned about it. Wow.
conservative = racist
What's so hard to understand here?
THANK YOU.
njguy93@yahoo.com
http://forums.hannity.com/
Despite Hannity's personal projection of being a "Great American", all one need do to see who his REAL associates are is to read the posts in "Washington Politics"! By Hannity's own standard of "guilt by association", these are his forums and his moderators and as such he is condoning and encouraging the vile, racist, hat-filled and seditious content there. My guess is that the FBI regularly keeps track of the posts and posters there.
Some of the most disturbing posts are done by Hannity's MODERATORS, such as this from right after Obama's inauguration:
"The fate of America, perhaps the world, was sealed today with the coranation of the Filthy Pig Obama and his Marxist Regime. First and foremost I am an American. I will defend the Flag, the Nation, and the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic. Obama is a Filthy Marxist anti-American Pig. I will fight and defend my country against the Obama Marxist Coup and Plague".
Dove-tailing with that is a new topic thread that is a MUST READ:
"Another suggestion for STARTING to deal with the problems being inflicted on America"
http://forums.hannity.com/showthread.php?t=1510811
My understanding is that Disney/ABC actually finances Hannity's website and forums, where truly anything goes, except for crticizing Hannity or Limbaugh!
If you have something to add, that doesn't represent the lock step right wing radio tilt of things, please do so. If not, prepare to be smacked down.
I find that this left-right distinction only drives people apart. Most of us believe in the freedom of individuals, due process, and the Constitutional republic that our country was intended to be. While it may be good for liberal or neo-conservative blogs, its not good for the republic. The actions of a few evil people should be understood as such, when the situation calls for it. And it appears that these folks were lone nuts who acted alone. Vilifying a vague group like "right wing extremist" is only sure to pull people apart, rather than bring people together.
However, it's conservatives in the media who are playing to the irrational fears of these nuts with baseless conspiracy theories and alarmist rhetoric.