Ever since the Trayvon Martin case – where the dark-skinned youth was killed by white George Zimmerman – and especially since Zimmerman was found not guilty, WND has taken every opportunity to point out as many cases as it can when any single or group of “blacks” attacks “whites.” As kinda a, “See! This is really the issue, not the other way around!”
I’m not going to say this culminated in an article on September 8 by WND founder Joseph Farah because “culminated” implies that they’re done with it, and I expect they will continue. But, Farah spent his column discussing, “There Really Is a Black Mob Violence Epidemic.”
I think it important to get a flavor of Farah’s article, so I’m going to quote a lot. Specifically, the second, fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh paragraphs. The first paragraph I’m quoting is an e-mail that Farah received from a “black Christian conservative.”
“I simply wanted to email you because I am SO disturbed by your website constantly running stories about black-on-white violence,” wrote Bonnie. “Why? Please help me understand WHY? If you did both sides, I would understand you are making a statement about our culture. Please do not say that you are simply reporting a truth – there is a one-sided purpose here. It seems to me that you are intentionally planting seeds of racial resentment within your conservative and predominately Christian readership. This truly grieves me as a Christian since you offer so many good resources otherwise. I just don’t understand how you reconcile your Christian faith with, what seems to be, your one-sided racial bias.” …
Are there heinous examples of white-on-black violence in America today? Of course. There are 350 million Americans. Are WND reporters and editors uninterested in covering white racial violence when it rears its ugly head? Of course they are interested, willing and eager to report it.
But understand what WND is and represents. WND is not a local or regional news agency. It is a national and even worldwide news agency. As such, we must use our precious and limited editorial resources to bring you news that is not duplicative of the thousands of other news sources out there.
One of the many disturbing trends the rest of the media have ignored over the last two or three years is the rapid escalation of black mob attacks on whites. I would characterize it as an epidemic of violence – racially motivated violence usually involving multiple attackers.
Because other news agencies are not reporting these incidents, it is literally impossible for Americans – black or white – to understand the problem or to come to grips with the truth. There’s no doubt the absence of honest reporting by others spurred WND’s conscious decision to report the trend, and, more importantly, to illustrate it frequently with coverage of individual attacks, usually supplemented with video.
I’m not entirely sure what to make of this. I read it as him clearly admitting his bias, but that illustrates a bit of my own bias against WND. Is it valid to – if you are the primary news source (along with FOX news of course) for millions of people – only report on one side of the issue because you naïvely assume that the readers will get the other side from other news outlets (when in reality you probably know they won’t and you’re just stirring up the base)? I’m not 100% sure on this one.
What are your thoughts?