How Right-Wing Media Have Used Ebola To Scare Americans

How Right-Wing Media Have Used Ebola To Scare Americans

Is this really what right wing Americans think of as 'news' and 'objective' reporting?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RW6qHh7bR2U

 

I didn't know there was a left-wing and a right-wing media, but I do know it's all bullshit regardless, and that CNN and others have done their fair share of scaring the crap out of people over Ebola as well. Not sure why things like this have to be made into something partisan when they're already blown out of proportion to begin with.

Everyone knows Glenn Beck is a joke anyway (and Alex Jones, and Bill O'Reilly, and that Ingraham bitch). I can't think of too many people who take these people seriously. Probably the same people who take the media seriously in general.

 

Pew research just released as study suggesting that those who identify themselves as conservatives get their news overwhelmingly from one source, fox news, while liberals get their news from many sources.

 

They all report the same bullshit, but with a different spin. Who cares?

 

Well it seems CNN at least once tried to tackle the hysteria

[SIZE=10pt]On CNN, PBS Science Correspondent Slams Media's Ebola Coverage: "I Get Embarrassed For Our Brethren In Journalism" [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]http://mediamatters.org/video/2014/10/05/on-cnn-pbs-science-correspondent-slams-medias-e/201022[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10pt]*[/SIZE]

But again with the right wing pundits it’s the tying of things into some kind of conspiracy knot - that 'lefties’ were trying to spread the disease and Obama would like white Americans to get it as punishment for slavery.

 

I actually watched the video, and while there isn't a single person in it who isn't a well-paid propagandist, there were some legitimate points made, particularly with regard to the borders. Unfortunately, any point made which had some legitimacy was presented in such a hyper-politicized, partisan context, that it ruined any of the legitimacy it might have had had it been said by a non-talking head.

 

But me, I think that the idea that of the threats which can blame the totality of mankind, Ebola is the "most for the least". Obama is misinforming the American social attitude and basically distrusting the individual in it from making his own decision. If the epidemic of fear, sickness and panic happen it will be in our cities. We should seriously, at least I, should be considering moving to northern Ontario, or maybe Alberta; there I ahall reside safe from all you paranoid people. ISIS threats in north America; hu

 

It seems that I’m not the only one that noticed – here is Gary Younge in the Guardian

Ebola has exposed America's fear, and Barack Obama's vulnerability : The virus is a metaphor for all that conservatives loathe, and sees the president’s policies under renewed attack

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/19/ebola-america-fear-barack-obama-virus

 

Balbus posed the question. It seems you care to make a specific point about it. All accounts contain a degree of bullshit simply for the fact that any one view represents a corridor of refraction in a much larger world that contains many more details than can possibly be taken in by any one perspective. Obviously our attention is co-opted by the entertaining. It is far easier to flip a switch and feel informed about the world than it is to investigate life. You appear to me to be just as mesmerized by media the only difference being your choice in underground or counterculture sources about some issues but then are affected by mainstream merchandising when it comes to the health and beauty isle. I say these things in response to your question about who cares. What would you have to talk about if not for the media?

 

Well here are a couple of articles form the Huffington post and Salon that seem to be trying to bring about a bit of sense.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/21/media-ebola-coverage_n_6017734.html

http://www.salon.com/2014/10/06/a_message_to_the_media_stop_being_scared_of_ebola_and_start_being_ashamed_of_yourselves/

*

The thing for me is not the ill-informed hysteria the problem is that some people just seem to accept it without question – it’s easy enough to get informed.

As to those that accept the idea that the Ebola outbreak is some kind of left wing conspiracy or that its aimed at America, it just seems madness. How can any rational news network invite these people to speak?

[edit]

Exactly

 

The Right can counter charges of hysteria with the reply: " It is settled science" Sound familiar?


Yes Balbus you are on to something; political partisans display their own brand of hysteria depending on their views.


I view Ebola through the lens of global warming

 

Piney

Sorry can you explain

Are you implying that people saying that the ebola outbreak is some kind of left wing conspiracy and that Obama would like white Americans to get it as punishment for slavery, is the same as scientists warning about global warming?

 

Well the Ebola is clearly a factual happenstance as proved by science. The hysteria attendant is blown way out of scientific proportion with people grafting conspiracy theories you mentioned on to it.


Political partisans display their own brand of hysteria according to their views.

 

Using fear and misinformation to sway voters as election day draws near. What else is new?

 

I don't think the Ebola fear is a right or left wing thing as I've seen nbc and cnn also make a big deal... or a KINDA big deal anyways about Ebola. In any case, yea, everyone...everyone, everyone, everyone... knows Glenn Beck is a freaking whack job.... so, can't really say he represents the right wing in general.

 

The whole reason they are called "wings" at all is because they represent the furthest extreme for each side. Far left and far right are actually the minority in number for each side. So assuming that "conservatives" are all "far right" is bigoted. MOST of the voters in the US are much closer to the middle on all issues. Yet, American politics has devolved into a left/right brawl every 2 years.

The politicians themselves have become confused because they rely on poll data and focus groups to decide their actual position on issues. Look how many on BOTH sides have changed their tune once elected. I noticed a comment about how so many conservatives flock to Fox news. Why is this a surprise when MOST of the rest of the news services are left (CNN) to hard left (MSNBC)?

I personally have to read well over a dozen news sources before I feel like I have some kind of picture of the truth. I can't rely on the left or the right entirely. What I do find interesting though is that the people on the left, while screaming to the hills for "tolerance" and "acceptance" have proven to be the exact opposite in practice. While I am an independent voter and will vote for the person who seems to have the answers, regardless of party, I have found that the most insane arguments I have had about politics have come exclusively from someone representing the "left".

The debate usually started well and ended with them calling me childish names instead of discussing the issue. And that usually comes when I ask an obvious, but tough question. For example, the US halted travel from other nations many times in history because of deadly illnesses. It's a simple prevention measure that only makes logical sense when the illness is effectively an ocean away. BUT, the mere suggestion that we should halt travelers from west Africa has been screamed down as "racism".

Folks, this disease doesn't care what color anyone is. And closing travel from west African nations does NOT mean we are abandoning them, after all, we're already there treating people and have been for a very long time. What we see today is a LOT of knee-jerking in politics and a lot of stupid talk. We have the left trying to tell us that all white people are the spawn of slavers and racists and we have the right talking about varying degrees of rape.

Both extremes are sheer stupidity. But ask yourself this; are you willing to actually talk to someone on the opposite side without pulling the bag of tricks into the discussion? Can you leave the slogans and jabs aside and actually discuss the issues without getting into an emotional mess? If not, avoid politics.

 

I thought Fox news was like professional wrestling.

Well, you learn something new every day.

 

George

There is a centre and from the centre there come wings that go to tips and those tips are the furthest extreme from the centre.

But the thing to ask is - where is the centre?

What ‘conservatives’ are you talking about, conservatives with a small see is someone who wishes to conserve the status quo in that sense you can have conservatively minded left wingers.

That is why many people don’t use conservative to denote a right wingers instead saying right wing with explanation of views and some right wingers do seem to hold ‘far right’ views.

What is the middle view?

For me the US doesn’t seem to have a left wing and very little pulling from the left – basically the Democrats as a party are right of centre liberals and the Republicans are further right and there are forces that are pulling from even further to the right (like the Tea party and right wing libertarians).

So it could be argued that the ‘centre’ in the US politics is actually to the right, in terms of political ideas.

But if as you say most Americans are in the middle then such polls and groups should reflect that?

If your premise that most Americans are of the middle is correct then something is wrong with you premise that politicians don’t reflect those views because they base them on polls and focus groups must be wrong?

Or is something else going on?

I think you are viewing this through the prism of your own bias – it’s the same here in the UK where the BBC is said to be ‘left wing’ by many on the right when what they mean is that it at least tries to be unbiased and objective and so isn’t biased to the right, which they don’t like.

Can you give examples of these sources, I mean you seem to be saying you think MSBC is hard left.

You would have to explain what you mean – otherwise it just comes across as biased

You would have to explain what you mean by “insane arguments” - otherwise it just comes across as biased.

 

George

Again - can you supply any examples?

But the question you pose isn’t a tough one.

Examples please, I can’t think of any off the top of my head.

As far as I know there are no direct flights from the Ebola affected countries to the US. So are you suggesting stopping all flights and all shipping from arriving in the US from any destination on the off chance that someone from the area might be on it?

Really man who the hell have you been talking to? Again you need to supply examples of this.

I’d have to repeat as far as I know there are no direct flights from the Ebola affected countries. So are you suggesting stopping all flights and all shipping from arriving in the US from any destination, on the off chance that someone from the area might be on it?

Wouldn’t that be a knee-jerk reaction?

What, where, again can you actually give examples of this?

But you seem to be pulling out the bag of tricks, I mean time and again you make jibs and make claims against the left even going so far to say theirs have ’exclusively’ the most insane arguments without putting up the least bit of evidence or why you think them insane - its a slogan

It just makes you claims to objectivity and wanting to discuss things rationally sound hollow.