The shooting at a grocery store in Buffalo is jarring and disturbing, with ten lives taken by a young, damaged individual. Also disturbing in nature is the way the press is reacting with a uniform reaction of blame and guilt. What makes this more unsettling is that in less than 24 hours, the victims became PR pawns as coordination appeared on the horizon within the journalism sector.
The revealing aspect is that numerous other violent outbreaks were witnessed within a matter of days, yet all the energy, fear-mongering, and conspiracy expert opinion are all uniquely focused.
- Madison, Wisconsin – An office is firebombed
- Keizer, Oregon – A community center location is hit with Molotov cocktails.
- Buffalo, New York – Shooting at a grocery store
- Laguna Woods, California – Shooting takes place at a church on Sunday
- Dallas, Texas – Shooting at a salon on Wednesday
As most know, of all of these incidents, one is getting far more coverage – and one is getting far more "analysis." A proper thinking individual might suggest these all warrant a level of introspection, yet the press in this country have shown that being proper is not a highly-listed priority. It does not take long to see why there is a very selective level of outrage with these incidents.
In California, it was a Taiwanese church shot up by an Asian man in his 60s. The Dallas salon saw Korean women who were the victims of a black shooter. And in both of the firebombings last week, you saw it was offices of pro-life groups that were targeted. Instantly, you can see the reason for media apathy in each attack. There is no favored narrative to be served.
Yet immediately, the cause of the Buffalo shooting was said to be radicalization by Fox News, specifically Tucker Carlson. It has been splashed across the news networks and social media, delivered with a high degree of certainty; they just know the shooter was inspired by Tucker. This, despite an abject lack of evidence.
The lone detail they can hang onto is that the 18-year-old professed to follow "white replacement theory," and this is said to be something that Tucker Carlson frequently covers on his show. Therefore, these serious journalists, with their training and expertise, have gathered that if an individual writes something about a topic, it means you are permitted to draw a direct link to a figure who has spoken favorably about said topic.
Of course, this means that the tired practice of evidence needs to be dispatched, but thankfully for so many of these journalists, it is easily done.
The Buffalo mass-murder suspect echoed a “theory” popularized by conservative-media commentators. Latest by me: https://t.co/cEY6TylRwu
— Paul Farhi (@farhip) May 15, 2022
What Tucker Carlson is doing by peddling “replacement theory” and other white nationalist talking points is dangerous and we called it out today and asked the head of the NAACP what can be done about it. pic.twitter.com/NaTNezFiXK
— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) May 15, 2022
And these are but a sample. Across the media complex, this very proposal is echoed; the punk was radicalized by Fox, and Tucker was the conduit to his hate. So, where is this coming from if there is no evidence to point at as proof? Ah, this is where the journalists have ensnared themselves, because they can only go to this area of accusals by relying on a sole source, and that source is what trips them up at the same time – the killer's manifesto.
In the 180-page screed – much of it cribbed from a manifesto written by a prior shooter – is where the emergence of the white replacement commentary derives. But in order for any journalist to rest on this as proof that Tucker is culpable, they also have to admit either blatant ignorance or craven avoidance of other aspects of this document. For starters, Tucker Carlson's name appears nowhere in this manifesto. Yes, the same press corps that found the unwritten words "Don't Say Gay" in a piece of Florida legislation have pegged Tucker to this rambling missive.
However, Fox News is mentioned in the document. The shooter had disdain for the network. They hired too many Jews, you see. Thus, they were stricken from favorability by the shooter, who is a former communist and self-describes as a leftist eco-fascist national-socialist. He wrote that "conservativism is corporatism in disguise, I want no part of it." Yet, this is the evidence the press uses to condemn Tucker and the right as the inspiration for Saturday's violence. And as they were busying themselves finding that non-existent evidence, note the stark lack of curiosity in the other episodes of violence.
Interesting that there is little to no exploration as to what may have motivated a sexagenarian of Far-East extraction to fire upon a California congregation. In the Dallas shooting, there is a reason for authorities to believe this is connected to other recent shootings targeting Asian businesses. Why is there no exploration as to what might be motivating a black individual to perpetrate a hate crime? As for the firebombings of pro-life offices, it is pretty clear why there is no curiosity about how the recent emotional press coverage of the abortion issue might have inspired those violent reactions.
Yet, these journalists are perfectly at ease leveling a charge that a prime time pundit is directly correlated to the deaths of ten people in Buffalo. It fits their narratives, serves their agenda, and, most revealing, suits their biased goals.
Who needs actual evidence when you can selectively contort elements to fit the pre-written script? They know they will not be challenged on the specifics because so many others in the press will take up the talking points and spread them freely.