Watching the pro-regime demonstrations in Iran, one can’t help but question such rabid affirmation of a government denying women’s equality, shooting protesters, tanking the economy, supporting terrorism, publicly executing dissidents, and withholding basic freedoms cherished by the West.
Yet, while that fervently observable support for arguably the worst abuser of human rights in the last half century can be explained by fear, that conclusion is only partially true.
For as despotic as Iran’s government is, it would still be relatively easy to remain invisible to the regime by staying silent rather than taking to the streets. So, fear alone does not adequately explain why people manically support the unsupportable.
Thus, such visibly fanatical approval of such a visibly repressive regime can also be explained as guiltless ignorance of civilized norms, fueled by state-controlled media unceasingly promoting a distorted reality.
However, the same blamelessness cannot be said of those many afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome, for it is those infected multitudes who fail to recognize that their knee-jerk TDS is a form of self-imposed ignorance. And so, it is their choice, theirs alone, to blindly accept the mainstream media’s unending negativity toward the 47th president.
Analysis from the Media Research Center clearly confirms what objective viewers already know; namely, that broadcast networks such as NBC, CBS, and ABC, and cable outlets such as CNN and MSNBC (rebranded a few months ago as MS NOW), are anything but fair and balanced.
That said, the clearest proof of that “deck is stacked” prejudice is their coverage of the 2024 presidential campaign, in which the legacy media cooked a partisan reality and served it to voters, consuming its bias as an undeniable truth.
In the four months before the election, ABC, CBS, and NBC reported roughly 80 percent positive coverage of Harris and 87 percent negative reporting of Trump. And another MRC dataset showed that, depending on the topic, over 90 percent of commentary was favorable toward Harris and over 97 percent was negative toward Trump.
Among the televised cable networks, CNN and MSNBC, CNN’s tone was generally positive, even defensive of Harris, while MSNBC was highly favorable, often celebratory of the vice president. Right-leaning Fox News was virtually alone in its cynical-to-hostile assessment of the former California senator.
Aside from Fox, Harris’ candidacy was described as historic, barrier-breaking, competent, and pro-democracy. Her numerous gaffes, personality quirks, and policy missteps were rarely mentioned, seldom questioned, and never dwelt upon.
And whatever problems existed during her term, even if acknowledged, were not personalized as her failures. Overwhelmingly, major setbacks related to immigration or the economy were often downplayed as global, inherited, pandemic-related, or due to “legislative gridlock.”
Contrastingly, CNN’s reporting on Trump was strongly unfavorable, often framing him as a threat to democracy. Not to be outdone, MSNBC characterized Trump as authoritarian or even fascist and normalized its coverage in intensely negative terms.
So, during the most lopsided reporting in history, coverage of Trump by those cable networks was nearly all negative. Consistently highlighted were Trump’s connection to Jan. 6, his economic policies “only benefiting the rich,” his “extreme” position on abortion, and his legal troubles, including indictments, trials, allegations, and legal setbacks.
The bottom line for CNN and MSNBC was that because “democracy was on the ballot” in 2024, the “bigoted and xenophobic” Trump was “unfit for office.”
Not surprisingly, MRC described Fox’s depiction of Trump as mixed, noting some criticism of his personality, largely positive assessments of his policy, and often sympathetic coverage of his “lawfare” legal challenges. And especially on prime-time opinion shows, Fox framed him as a victim of a politicized system fueled by overblown progressive attacks.
Conversely, Fox viewed Harris skeptically and often negatively as part of the Democratic establishment that weaponized institutions such as the FBI. More specifically, Fox characterized her as a failed “border czar,” overly reliant on identity politics, and a rubber stamp for the disastrous Bidenomics.
But unrelenting still today, those criticisms pale in comparison to the tsunami of attacks directed at Trump for whatever he says, does, or seeks to accomplish. With only slight exaggeration, if he says the sky is blue, the progressive response would be “not always,” and if he were to cure cancer, their reply would be, “What about the common cold?”
Thus, for millions of Trump haters, refusing even to entertain the possibility that the mainstream media is “patient zero” for TDS renders their self-imposed ignorance little different than the government-imposed fog of demonstrators chanting “death to America” in Iran.
The only difference is that we have the precious choice to be open-minded about what to believe, while demonstrators in Tehran have little alternative. And as a value deep-seated in our democracy, if Americans on both sides of the aisle refuse to seize that free-thinking opportunity to honestly seek a closer approximation of truth, it will be to our peril.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
